On Wednesday 07 June 2006 14:16, Christoph Lohmann wrote: > Good evening. >
Hey! > Am Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:07:14 -0700 schrieb "Corey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > _If_ one was interested in experimenting in developing an integrated > > graphical desktop environment on plan 9, one would use what - pure C? > > With what higher-level libraries would one use? Or would one write it > > all from scratch? > > There is a "integrated graphical desktop environment" on Plan 9, even if > you do not call it like that. > Do you use Plan 9 for your general-purpose, everyday, recreational computing environment? > So if you really have the moral and the power to even write a line of > code for a new "integrated graphical desktop environment" on Plan 9 > Well, that's sort of what I've been trying to say, (c8= I have neither the morale nor the power to write even a single line of code for this new "integrated graphical desktop environment" on Plan 9 -- I merely intend to assemble the work that others are doing; I'm like a child clumsily playing with lego bricks. The best that I can do is help write the gluework to get it working together nicely. As I just now read in a different post: On Wednesday 07 June 2006 15:33, Ronald G Minnich wrote: "I want plan 9, not linux tarted up to look like Plan 9." It's like this: _Were_ there a choice between running a general-purpose/consumer-oriented Plan 9 "distribution" of sorts, and running yet another linux distro - I would opt for the Plan 9 "distro" ( or whatever it would be called ); this hypothetical operating system would of course only be interesting so long as it were designed complementary to the very cool underlying Plan 9 concepts. But there currently is no such incarnation/form of Plan 9, and so I sometimes find myself idly speculating on what sort of task it would be to create one, and what this conceptual operating system might look like were it embarked upon. > then it would be done with underlying file servers, where you write "low > level" > libraries, for the graphical applications, that in the end do only a > simple write() on some file - nothing else. > You give the impression that the only way of writing 9p fileservers and consumer-oriented applications on Plan 9 is with pure C, and that this will always be the only way, and that it should always be the only way. You also make it sound as though higher-level libraries and/or object-oriented programming on Plan 9 are a complete waste in all circumstances. I honestly don't understand, but I'm also very ignorant - which is why I was hoping for friendly explanations on how and why my assumptions don't meet the reality. I think the primary rift is that the idea of a general-purpose, user-grade version of Plan 9 is distastefull and/or useless. Anyhow, I'm probably just becoming line-noise at this point. (c8= Cheers! Corey
