The users of a hundred programming languages would like to call your low-level code, but they can’t.

Things have changed in the last 20 years. More people are using languages like Python, Ruby, and a hundred more, that are further from the bare metal. People are building service stacks that tie together many lower-level functions.

Libraries and APIs that make low-level features available to convenient high-level languages (HLLs) are a good thing. As a HL coder, it’s pretty handy to install python-foo, type “import foo” and then have access to that functionality.

What if python-foo isn’t there? HLL users are out of luck, unless they are so determined they make their own python-foo that calls system(), and then parses the output using their language’s fancy text parsing features.

But system() is the devil. We hate system(), folks. If your code calls system() it’s bad, for four reasons:

Overhead. It creates a new process and subshell. Security. If your code has elevated privileges and is including text input by an untrusted user, watch out. Remember little Bobby Tables, a semicolon is a dangerous thing. Ease. Parsing command-line programs’ output can be a pain, even if your language helps lessen it. Parsing of errors is even harder and prone to be overlooked. Portability. A different platform may (or may not) have the program you’re relying on, or its output may be different, and you won’t know.

Early on when I was learning Python, I tried to write a gui for OProfile by parsing its output. OProfile did nice (for the user) things like adding headers on its output, and changing the format of output depending on what it found. Great for users, but it doomed my project. I couldn’t parse the output reliably.

You want to make it easy for the people who are language gurus for each of the hundred languages out there to wrap your functionality without having to become an expert in your code, or even change it. Then the hordes using all the hundred languages can use your library without being an expert in your code or being enough of a guru in their language to write a wrapper. They can just happily use it.

Here’s a positive development, kmod. kmod is a new implementation of the utilities in module-init-tools: modprobe, lsmod, lsmod, etc. Not only does kmod include a libkmod C library, but the commandline programs use it, so we know it works. Yeah! This made it super easy for someone (me) to come along and write a language wrapper (python-kmod) without having to know about module internals. python-kmod makes it easy for Python users to manipulate modules using the friendly language features they’re used to, like exceptions for errors, and lists. If I had been forced to use system(), it probably would have mostly worked, but it would have failed when output parsing failed for some edge case.

I encourage all low-level program writers, my fellow Linux Plumbers, to consider how to make native language bindings possible for your code. You don’t have to write them, just make them possible and you will find all sorts of people calling your code, safely, who couldn’t before.