Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Somehow, I always find it amusing how many FOSS programs assume 
>> Windows is basically how it was in Win98 and completely fail to do the 
>> right thing.
> 
> ...which does, on the other hand, have the side-effect of making it 
> compatible with Win98. ;-)

One might think that, but that tends not to be the case. In part, for 
example, it'll support things like memory-mapped files and etc. as well.

> Or, more likely, "we just took our C sources and recompiled them on top 
> of a POSIX emulator, so we can't do anything that POSIX doesn't support 
> / the emulator doesn't implement".

Yes. Altho I don't think that's really the case. Tcl, for example, has a 
whole X-windows emulation built in. That's why it's (a) somewhat slow, (b) 
tends to look like Motif, and (c) gets used everywhere as a graphics library 
for other languages. :-)

Come to think of it, one of the nice things about Tcl is how much people 
have made extensions for accessing Windows-like stuff.  Considering this, I 
expect I can find Python (for example) extensions to Do The Right Thing.

It really wasn't a complaint, as much as it was a "I wonder why people don't 
fix this when they do it in the first place" sort of thought. Sort of "if 
you're going to try to invent an algorithm to figure out where the home 
directory is, why not just ask the OS". If it was completely unsupported, I 
could see it, but to have it half-ass supported is ... half-ass.

Maybe I'm just getting sick of half-assed technology, tho.

>> And some people wonder why FOSS feels klunky on Windows.
> 
> Heh, well, the *really* fun thing is when you have to install GTK+ 
> before the program will run... We all know what happens then. ;-)

Actually, I don't think I do.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message