Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: window/event/conman questions Message-ID: <4728@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 10 Dec 89 21:43:26 GMT References: <29800002@inmet> <4688@sugar.hackercorp.com> <6377@stsusa.com> <4699@sugar.hackercorp.com> <6447@stsusa.com> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 21 In article <6447@stsusa.com> jellson@stsusa.com writes: > The purpose of my posting though wasn't really to discuss XLISP, it was > more a plea to build on the capabilities of ConMan rather to replace it. The problem is that ConMan isn't universally available. If your Smalltalk depends on having ConMan available it will reduce its utility. The ultimate console device has yet to be written. I've been thinking about doing something along those lines, but I really don't want to figure out all the details of writing a console handler myself. I know there are several out there... howcome none have been made publically available? > You seemed to suggest in your later posting that Smalltalk would be built > on a full-screen editing user interface. That wasn't me. Really, though, a Smalltalk UI should bear some relation to the *real* Smalltalk UI. -- Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva `-_-' 'U` "I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape somewhere"