Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!ames!dftsrv!drax!buck
From: buck@drax.gsfc.nasa.gov (Loren (Buck) Buchanan)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Will PEX become popular? (In English)
Message-ID: <1167@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: 9 Mar 90 14:55:32 GMT
References: <490eac1b.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Sender: news@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: buck@drax.gsfc.nasa.gov (Loren (Buck) Buchanan)
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation @ NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Lines: 32

In article <490eac1b.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> jch@apollo.HP.COM (Jan Hardenbergh) writes:

>PHIGS will be like FORTRAN. Lots of people will complain about it
>but it will be the best option they have. PHIGS will change over
>time to adapt to customer needs.

A better analogy is PHIGS is like ADA, GKS is like FORTRAN (well classic
FORTRAN).  Not only will PHIGS (GKS, CGI, CGM, PEX, X, etc.) change over
time but so will the hardware it runs on, the support software (operating
systems and other tools), but so will the mindset of the programmers
and users.  

>PHIGS will be the interface to PEX. Only those things that would normally
>change from vendor to vendor will change for PEX. So, still only a pain.

But this pain is small in comparison to starting from scratch for each
new system management/purchasing buys for us.

>I do agree that allowing some sort of object oriented interface to
>PHIGS would be a good idea. PHIGS is, technically, only a year old
>and already has quite a bit of support. It will change, sure. But
>get replaced? I don't think so.

I agree, it will be evolution, not revolution.  What ever replaces
PHIGS will have to be in the GKS-CGI-CGM-PHIGS family of standards.

B Cing U

Buck
Loren "Buck" Buchanan | internet: buck@drax.gsfc.nasa.gov | standard disclaimer
CSC, 1100 West St.    | uucp: ...!ames!dftsrv!drax!buck   | "By the horns of a
Laurel, MD 20707      | phonenet: (301) 497-2531 or 9898  | sky demon..."