Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucdavis!csusac!unify!openlook!openlook-request From: lwv27%CAS.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Larry W. Virden lwv27%cas.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu) Newsgroups: comp.windows.open-look Subject: Re(2): Misc OpenWindows 2.0 questions Message-ID: Date: 20 Mar 91 11:31:52 GMT Lines: 33 -------- Re: NeWS is not having problems, you're having difficulty understanding that X is not NeWS. In OW 2.0, if you want a nonrectangular window, you'll have to use NeWS, and by doing so the difference between X and NeWS will become all too obvious to you. :-) Nope - I am not having a difficulty. In many of the nondisclosure and training sessions subsequent to release of OpenWindows there was talk about how the interpreter worked. Discussions in particular dealt wiht how the interpreter would be able to handle any of the standard X protocols, and that as new protocols evolved, such as PEX, etc. that the interpreter should be able to be extended without a lot of problems. Other discussions dealt with the fact that NeWS would be able to do non-rectangular windows. Silly me thought - well, X11R4 thru the protocol, handles non-rec windows. NeWS handles non-rec windows. The interpreter handles X11R4 and NeWS. Therefore, SURELY the folks who wrote the interpreter added the few lines of calls that would take the X protocol requests and call the same routines (or similar ones) that NeWS protocols call. Then, when I saw the Xshape.o in Sun's libXext.a, I thought - "Ah Ha! I was right!". BUZZZZZZ! I was wrong apparently. -- Larry W. Virden UUCP: osu-cis!chemabs!lwv27 Same Mbox: BITNET: lwv27@cas INET: lwv27%cas.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu Personal: 674 Falls Place, Reynoldsburg,OH 43068-1614 America Online: lvirden --------