Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!hoptoad!tim From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) Newsgroups: net.micro.mac Subject: Re: Porting UNIX Applications to the Mac Message-ID: <1117@hoptoad.uucp> Date: Mon, 22-Sep-86 16:30:19 EDT Article-I.D.: hoptoad.1117 Posted: Mon Sep 22 16:30:19 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 22-Sep-86 21:37:01 EDT References: <8609170521.AA18527@cory.Berkeley.EDU> <1114@hoptoad.uucp> Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) Organization: Centram Systems, Berkeley Lines: 32 I'd like to thank all the people who've replied on this issue so far. I hope to have time to deal with all the major points soon, but for now, I just want to make a few comments. First, I mentioned pseudo-ttys as a necessity in the original article; this means that a psuedo-tty could easily be bound to a window interface for those situations in which a command language interface is preferable. Second, process interconnection with pipes fairly readily into an iconic shell interface. There would be a "pipe" icon on the desktop. Clicking on this would create a pipe-shaped icon; selecting application icons would then link them together into a piped process sequence. Finishing the select would probably be best accomplished by clicking again on the pipe. Yes, it's modal, but modality is not an absolute vice. Third, I suggested that an "interface description language" (obviously not IDL, the compiler language) could be implemented within the shell, and that each application could have a formally-described graphic interface in this way without having to run extra filter processes or modify the applications' code. Apparently this was not as clear as could be hoped. Fourth, I think command-language fans are overlooking one of the chief advantages of graphic interfaces, the impossibility of typing errors. Again, many thanks! -- Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot and Self-Assigner of Pretentious Titles {ihnp4,sun,well,ptsfa,lll-crg,frog}!hoptoad!tim (uucp) hoptoad!tim@lll-crg (arpa) Engineers gleefully note the inability of artists to solve technical problems, but angrily deny the atrophy of their own aesthetic sense.