1. 11

This is a tag to represent operating systems, kernels, and other such low-level design often referred to as “systems” programming. programming and compsci fit, (occasionally virtualization) but these are general catch-all tags. This wouldn’t be about the concept of systems as an abstract term for a grouping of things.

Downsides: It may be irrelevant.

  1.  

  2. 10

    I think we’ve talked about this before…I’d second it, provided we renamed the tag to operating systems or os in order to keep it from becoming a general flourish.

    1. 2

      Agreed.

      1. 2

        Seconded. I proposed os tag in 2015, by the way.

        1. 2

          That name seems liable to get itself slapped on stories about particular operating systems. Something like os design might be better, but systems programming also encompasses implementation concerns and techniques, and I’m not sure how to cover that all in a single term. “Systems programming” itself seems slightly too narrow. Hrmm.

          1. 1

            I think systems programming is probably the best term to describe it, although that has a slightly wider focus. For example, many would classify “writing a DNS server” as systems programming.

            IMHO, os and systems would probably get horribly misused. Posts can, of course, be re-tagged but I’m guessing a lot of people are going to get it wrong, at least on first try.

        2. 1

          Hmm, we have tags for many individual OSes already: android, freebsd, linux, mac, netbsd, openbsd, unix, and windows.

          1. 3

            Yes, but not OS theory or development.