Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix From: peter@ficc.uucp (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Subject: Re: Is POSIX degenerating into OSI? Message-ID: <466@longway.TIC.COM> Date: 5 Dec 89 22:16:00 GMT References: <462@longway.TIC.COM> <457@longway.TIC.COM> <458@longway.TIC.COM> Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM Reply-To: peter@ficc.uucp (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 25 Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman) From: uunet!ficc!peter (Peter da Silva) Regarding a standard API for windows: > I am not sure that X is the best > choice, but it is a widely accepted base: the basis for any standard. I'm pretty sure it isn't. X is not a very clean interface, and it's much too low-level. The standard interface should not require the programmer to manually create and destroy menus, handle expose events, and so on. Look at UNIX: the API was tiny, 35 or so system calls to do everything that other operating systems required hundreds of entry points to do. You just dealt with files... details like disk space allocation, buffer allocation, and so on were hidden from the user. Window systems should be like this. Something like the X toolkits, but without the toolkits' underlying complexity. --- `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . 'U` Also or . "If you want PL/I, you know where to find it." -- Dennis Volume-Number: Volume 17, Number 93