Architecture Design Classic case: X Form System

X window was developed by MIT in 1984. One of its design philosophies is: the provision of mechanisms. Instead of strategies (similar to object-oriented thinking, "programming for interfaces rather than implementing programming"). Mechanism (mechanism) refers to what functions are required to be provided. Policy refers to how these functions are implemented.

X window will "provide the mechanism." Rather than strategy, this philosophy is carried out thoroughly so that the core agreement is basically stable. There is no need for a particularly large change.

You may be surprised. For 30 years. The core of X window is not very big change, it can adapt to the rapid development of modern desktop? It is time again to mention the design advantage of X window, where X window provides an extension layer outside the core layer, and developers can develop corresponding extensions to implement their own extension protocols.

The core of X window is basically dealing with server/client, drivers and the like, and the external support is basically through "extension".

There's nothing wrong with that. The structure of the X window is well-designed, though it is an extension, but they do not have any performance problems whatsoever. It's better to have some support for new technologies and things, and easy maintenance by extension.

So you see. Although 30 years on, GNOME, KDE, based on X window, can still compete with Windows, Mac OS x, and even some aspects of the same period. You will have to admire the correctness of the design philosophy that these predecessors laid down at the time of their initial design.

X Form system Architecture diagram

Architecture Design Classic case: X Form System