Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
From: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: An Intuition.device?
Message-ID: <1170@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de>
Date: 11 Sep 90 21:24:09 GMT
References: <30021@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Reply-To: p554mve@mpirbn.UUCP (Michael van Elst)
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut fuer Radioastronomie, Bonn
Lines: 26

In article <30021@nigel.ee.udel.edu> BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes:
>   In some of his speeches, RJ Mical has told about how it was the intention
>of the original Amiga OS developers to make Intuition a device instead of
>a collection of routines (as it is now).  Had Intuition been made a 
>device, software development would have been a hundred times easier,
>because thing like opening screens and windows, creating menu items, and
>receiving mouse input from the user would be done by passing codes to
>the Intuition device and receiving information from it.  

Most times, Mister MB does not know what he's talking about. User input
IS done by receiving information about input events, and (some) actions
like opening windows and screens are done by passing the intuition task
messages to do so. Then asking for mouse information is polling whereas
a multi-tasking friendly program is event driven.
And then I don't think that sending codes by an application will make
software development easier than just calling a system routine that
does this. Actually this is a question for purists (of message passing
systems). Maybe MB likes to use the X window system on the X protocol
level.

Regards,
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."