[unios] POSIX and networks (Was: Generic Design)

[Anders Petersson]

From: Anders Petersson <anders.petersson@mbox320.swipnet.se>

At 04:03 1998-12-15 , you wrote:
>From: Pieter Dumon <Pieter.Dumon@rug.ac.be>
>
>> 
>> From: Anders Petersson <anders.petersson@mbox320.swipnet.se>
>> 
>> >
>> >That's easy to implement on POSIX too, and you can hide teh details from
>> >the user too. And with POSIX, it is far more easier to apply multiple
>> >filters or transformers to an input stream (file) in serie or in parallel
>> >to one file. Your design needs to switch between OH's to achieve this. 
>> 
>> Is that really easier with POSIX? I don't see why. Of course different OH's
>> are needed to accomplish anything like this... There's no way even POSIX
>> can avoid this.
>> If what you mean is my previous example, in fact only one OH is needed - it
>> can both support exporting text as the original format and some general
>> format... it's up to the OH.
>
>I think you should really explain me OH's and interfaces again...
>I think I just don't understand what you mean right now.

OK, just did that in another mail.

>> >> If you have a list object type, you can take the output
>> >> of one program and feed it - in the form of a list - to another program.
>> >> Everything that can be done by piping in Unix can be done just as
good with
>> >> my method, and often better.
>> >
>> >But what you descrive __IS__ POSIX !
>> 
>> What I described *is* not POSIX. It may resemble POSIX, but it is not the
>> same. In what formats can POSIX pipe information? Is it text and binary,
or?
>
>Your system is also just piping binary. It's the OH's that interprete it. 
>In Unix, its the utilities that interprete it.

Sounds correct. The difference would be that my model more emphasizes the
use of standardized data structures. Kinda.

>> >> >> but I can't say it's just Posix with a different name...
>> >> >I'm not saying it's POSIX, I'm saying it can be done more effectively,
>> >> >more powerfully and more flexibly with POSIX. Add the power of X to
>> >> >this... 
>> >> 
>> >> Add the power of *my GUI* to what I've said, and I think it would well
>> >> out-weight Unix power/flexibility.
>> >
>> >Have you allready _used_ networked X ?
>> 
>> Nope. But since I can't imagine (I can be wrong) a single example of
>> networking which would be hard to solve with my design... I don't think it
>> can be less good than networked X. And, I heard some critizism to X some
>> time ago... so I guess it's not perfect.
>
>Off course it's not perfect, but with a nice window manager and the right
>security, it's about a million times more powerful than the Win32 UI.
>For me, networks are of primary importance. I'm not a SUN adict at all,
>but   the Network *is* the Computer.

Yes, networking is important, in some cases very essential. Could you
please mention the most important features you think a networked UI should
implement?

binEng

------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at http://www.onelist.com and
select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UniOS Group
http://members.xoom.com/unios