• Cawifre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m no expert, but my take on the situation is that POSIX is a very old, very stable, relatively powerful API. If figure out a workflow that uses only POSIX tools, then you have very high confidence that you can reuse that workflow across any POSIX-compliant environment.

    • Ging@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      But if it’s just an old api, why is it still in the spotlight? I understand compatibility is important, but I’m almost never hearing half as much about any of the other old apis–can’t even really think of one either

      • arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        It covers the majority of basic things you need your computer to do and it works practically everywhere. If you target POSIX (and you avoid uncommon features that some systems don’t implement), your program will probably run on Linux, macOS, *BSDs, random OSes you’ve never heard of, Windows (with certain setups), maybe your toaster, etc. It has a lot of inertia behind it at this point.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Because it avoids this

        It’s the baseline of UNIX, with Linux maintaining most compatibility, meaning servers around the world, desktop environments including MacOS and GNU/Linux, gaming machines (including video game consoles like PlayStation and Steam Deck), mobile devices like Android and Apple Devices, mainframe computing systems, embedded systems, so on and so forth. It makes up the backbone of our technology infrastructure. It continues to be iterated on, and is tightly bound with the C programming language and its improvements and iterations.