Re: [dev] [st] windows port?

From: Sam Watkins <sam_AT_nipl.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:07:11 +1000

One of the main suckless devs Uriel did commit suicide not long ago.
Perhaps people here could refrain from saying "kill yourself",
out of respect to him. Or did he talk that way also?

Did the same people spit the dummy, when dwm was ported to Windoze?

There are already tolerable terminals for windows, such as rxvt (msys),
and half of putty (which you could use with a local sshd / telnetd).
DOS programs (e.g. edit.com) don't work with Unix terminals.

You could write your own terminal or try to port st for 'fun'. You might
like to write a portable terminal in standard C or C++, perhaps using SDL
or a framebuffer, which would be useful on systems without X or Windoze.
Someone did this already to some extent.

Anyhow, it might be good to get some more experience with Plan 9 and
suckless programs / systems / code style before posting too much here...
so that people will not have cause to abuse you.

Basic HTML is not bad in itself, but modern HTML + CSS + DOM + JS +
multitude of incompatible browsers is ridiculously sucky. Basic HTTP is
not bad, simplified with minor changes it could be like a plain-text 9p.

I'd say X11 sucks almost as much as Windows; and in some ways, 9p sucks
more than http. But UNIX is a lot better than DOS.

Sam
Received on Fri Apr 12 2013 - 06:07:11 CEST