> The letter isn't coherent, and I think people are reacting to that.
I don't agree about the quality of the article, but it's the "hate" (your word) I was reacting to when I made my comment. Some of the reactions here are genuinely over the top. Add in the fact that the author of the ACM piece knows the POSIX subject matter a lot better than the people commenting, and it's just... classic late stage hn, I guess.
I’m sure he does know POSIX better than most, but that doesn’t mean we should laud any drivel he produces.
I think people are reacting to the provocative idea combined with lack of substance in the response. But the letter itself was probably an off-the-cuff remark and wasn’t intended to be consumed and debated analytically.
I don't agree about the quality of the article, but it's the "hate" (your word) I was reacting to when I made my comment. Some of the reactions here are genuinely over the top. Add in the fact that the author of the ACM piece knows the POSIX subject matter a lot better than the people commenting, and it's just... classic late stage hn, I guess.