Re: [dev] [st] windows port?

From: Max DeLiso <>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:48:51 -0400

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Joseph Xu <> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Max DeLiso <> wrote:
>> A) That's stupid
>> B) Therefore OP must be stupid.
> I don't think you're stupid, because the few times I've had to use
> cmd.exe, I've thought about this myself. But I do think it's a waste of
> time. How much do you use the console in Windows? Very few native Windows
> programs are written for it, and the ones that exist certainly do not
> expect or take advantage of VT102 emulation for curses functionality. So
> the benefit of the port is minimal. I think you are just trying
> to shoehorn the paradigm of one OS into another.

You make a great point. Almost all programs which depend on curses
already would need to be ported to NT anyways, and there are already
(as mentioned before), methods for doing this which already work.

> On the other hand, I think a nicer console program without terminal
> emulation and nicer GUI features, along the lines of 9term, would be
> much simpler to implement and may be worth the cost.

The cost is minimal, I enjoy doing writing this code because I
inevitably end up learning more about system design. In fact last time
I was working on this project, I ended up finding CVE-2013-0076 :). I
will reconsider inclusion of terminal emulation.

Thanks for the input!
Received on Thu Apr 11 2013 - 19:48:51 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Apr 11 2013 - 20:00:07 CEST