<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Importance Of Pipes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sidawson.com/2009/03/importance-of-pipes.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sidawson.com/2009/03/importance-of-pipes.html</link>
	<description>Self Improving Software. Evolutionary Algorithms. Weak AI.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:48:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Si Dawson</title>
		<link>http://sidawson.com/2009/03/importance-of-pipes.html/comment-page-1#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Si Dawson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sidawson.com/?p=14#comment-11</guid>
		<description>Ha! How could I not reply to this for so long? Very slack of me, I apologise.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You&#039;re quite right - in many unexpected ways, DOS was further ahead than the windows behemoth (which is what I was referring to). The difficulty of piping GUI apps together drastically limited the ability of windows apps to scale with anywhere near the simplicity &amp; flexibility of unix (or even dos, text based) systems.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I believe they&#039;ve started re-addressing this in the last 5 years or so, with a &quot;power&quot; user version of dos shipping as a support kit for admins, buuut, it&#039;s still really bandaids on an architectural limitation. Developing a good GUI O/S, it&#039;s not for amateurs :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha! How could I not reply to this for so long? Very slack of me, I apologise.</p>
<p>You&#39;re quite right &#8211; in many unexpected ways, DOS was further ahead than the windows behemoth (which is what I was referring to). The difficulty of piping GUI apps together drastically limited the ability of windows apps to scale with anywhere near the simplicity &#038; flexibility of unix (or even dos, text based) systems.</p>
<p>I believe they&#39;ve started re-addressing this in the last 5 years or so, with a &#8220;power&#8221; user version of dos shipping as a support kit for admins, buuut, it&#39;s still really bandaids on an architectural limitation. Developing a good GUI O/S, it&#39;s not for amateurs <img src='http://sidawson.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Batch-code Jack</title>
		<link>http://sidawson.com/2009/03/importance-of-pipes.html/comment-page-1#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Batch-code Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sidawson.com/?p=14#comment-9</guid>
		<description>(additional info)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Most people who use DOS batches are probably aware of the redirectors &quot;&lt;&quot; and &quot;&gt;&quot;, which are also tremendously useful, but the true pipe &quot;&#124;&quot; is often misunderstood and not used.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(additional info)</p>
<p>Most people who use DOS batches are probably aware of the redirectors &#8220;&lt;&#8221; and &#8220;&gt;&#8221;, which are also tremendously useful, but the true pipe &#8220;|&#8221; is often misunderstood and not used.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Batch-code Jack</title>
		<link>http://sidawson.com/2009/03/importance-of-pipes.html/comment-page-1#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Batch-code Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:47:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sidawson.com/?p=14#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Great post, as usual Si... I&#039;ve not checked for a while and just caught up on your other blog as well. Small correction for you though - the &quot;other operating system&quot; you refer to (presumably ms-dos?) also has pipes, and it&#039;s had them since version 1.25 as far as I know. Very useful things, too! :)   The main problem is that not all applications written for it are able to use them, which is where it all falls down a bit.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As I recall though, you wrote some very small apps for me in the early 1990&#039;s when I worked at DIA, which created date-strings for use at command prompt levels. I used pipes to get them where I wanted then. Thanks for those, btw! :)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Looking at what you&#039;re describing, having lots of small programs doing small tasks to accomplish the larger task, reminds me of using the OS as a language like FORTH, where you slowly build up the language by creating small commands which do minor tasks, until finally you have one command that does what you want. I guess the OS (DOS or UNIX derivatives, or even CP/M for that matter, if you remember that far back) can be used in the same way...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;  - Jack</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, as usual Si&#8230; I&#39;ve not checked for a while and just caught up on your other blog as well. Small correction for you though &#8211; the &#8220;other operating system&#8221; you refer to (presumably ms-dos?) also has pipes, and it&#39;s had them since version 1.25 as far as I know. Very useful things, too! <img src='http://sidawson.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />    The main problem is that not all applications written for it are able to use them, which is where it all falls down a bit.</p>
<p>As I recall though, you wrote some very small apps for me in the early 1990&#39;s when I worked at DIA, which created date-strings for use at command prompt levels. I used pipes to get them where I wanted then. Thanks for those, btw! <img src='http://sidawson.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Looking at what you&#39;re describing, having lots of small programs doing small tasks to accomplish the larger task, reminds me of using the OS as a language like FORTH, where you slowly build up the language by creating small commands which do minor tasks, until finally you have one command that does what you want. I guess the OS (DOS or UNIX derivatives, or even CP/M for that matter, if you remember that far back) can be used in the same way&#8230;</p>
<p>  &#8211; Jack</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

