Re: [dev] [st] windows port?

From: Max DeLiso <maxdeliso_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:38:25 -0400

On Apr 11, 2013 11:23 AM, "Martti Kühne" <mysatyre_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Max DeLiso <maxdeliso_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well it does add an extra layer of abstraction which could be a source
of
> > bugs. Also that would make contributing significantly more difficult
for the
> > Windows people.
>
>
> People use windows because they don't know any better. They don't even
> want to know any better. Let's write suckless code and then hide it
> under three layers of dysfunctional GUI and press F1 for help... I
> think not even F1 will help you with your virus-infected,
> self-destructive, noob-friendly piece of shit OS.
>
> That said, I remember good times with windows. Back when I downloaded
> and installed $actual_os.

I completely agree that Windows is a legacy OS, but plenty of people are
still forced to use it for many legitimate reasons.

>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:17 PM, pancake <pancake_AT_youterm.com> wrote:
> > definitevly debugging cygwin programs is almost impossible (try it by
> > yourself), but anyway.. what's the point of using C++? and well.. i
guess
> > you know that st depends on X and pty. and windows have none of those
> > things? and well. who cares about windows nowadays?
> >
>
> Never did that. Thanks for the heads-up, although I was already under
> the impression that on windows nothing at all can be debugged,
> because, well, where's the fucking source to anything?
>

You can actually get symbols for large parts of the internals. The
documentation is generally quite good too. And for the undocumented parts
you can always reverse.

> cheers!
> mar77i
>
Received on Thu Apr 11 2013 - 17:38:25 CEST