Re: [dev] dwm in a window

I will note that devdraw has been ported to run on top of X
(http://plan9.us), and X has been ported to run on top of devdraw
(equis by fgb).

(Devdraw has also been ported to win32 as part of drawterm and
inferno, and as part of a GSoC project to port 9vx to windows.)

So if somebody wanted to build a new window system, that IMHO seems
like a natural starting point.

uriel

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:58 PM, David Tweed<david.tweed_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Kurt H Maier<karmaflux_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Anselm R Garbe<garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> a) on top of existing ones
>>>
>>> b) existing ones on top
>>>
>>> I tend to a) atm just because it would make porting to other platforms
>>> so much simpler.
>>
>> There is no point to running a window system on top of an existing
>> window system, unless there is some religious abstraction method
>> you're married to.  Implementing a gui that runs on a gui ends up with
>> crap like WINE. I can understand arguments that x11 needs to be
>> replaced, and I can understand (some) arguments that x11 needs to be
>> left alone, but the idea that x11 needs to be *supplemented* is
>> amazing.
>
> The advantage of running something on top of X during development is
> that users can experiment with it whilst still being able to run their
> existing applications, thus getting hopefully some people interested
> in doing development because they like using what's currently there.
> Otherwise, you end up with something like Berlin, the Y windowing
> system, the "full" display-postscript compositing engine behind "full"
> GNUstep and all those other "new" windowing systems that never
> actually got anywhere near completion because the only thing one could
> do with them in their current state was development.
>
> (Before anyone asks, I'm unlikely to get involved in developing a new
> windowing system precisely because I suspect that it would be very
> difficult to defy the historical patter that a lot of code would be
> written but development would stall before a day-in-day-out usable
> system would be completed. Mind you, I'm weird in that I tend to
> prefer existing software that I can use to eulogising about how in
> principle there's this great way of doing things but whose current
> incarnation doesn't have any way of acheiving the tasks I want to use
> my computer for today ;-) )
>
> --
> cheers, dave tweed__________________________
> computer vision reasearcher: david.tweed_AT_gmail.com
> "while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." --
> attempted insult seen on slashdot
>
>
Received on Tue Jul 07 2009 - 20:31:40 UTC