I think another way of thinking about this interface is: it’s kind of like an abstraction over Linux system calls and ntdll. It’s naturally gonna have a kind of subset of all the useful calls, with some wrapping.
I don’t see anything wrong with this, it’s kind of how Windows forces developers to use DLL to access syscalls (the syscall numbers can change) which IMO is a good architectural decision.
Except it's not. I've implemented it, over its multiple iterations, so I'm familiar with it. It's an interface to satisfy the needs of the Zig compiler. It's heavily lacking for use in server applications.
I don’t see anything wrong with this, it’s kind of how Windows forces developers to use DLL to access syscalls (the syscall numbers can change) which IMO is a good architectural decision.