From: "Joel Salomon" <salomo3@cooper.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] porting from vs. porting to Plan 9
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 13:08:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2621.199.98.16.93.1066410500.squirrel@wish> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7f68bb19aa8d8ecb13d5f53c96524b1a@centurytel.net>
Steve said:
> However being able to write code for and on plan 9 and
> then just re-compile it with a library for Windows and
> X11 would be wonderfull.
Skip Tavakkolian said:
> I think there could be other reasons for this. I would rather program
> graphics using libdraw because it would be save me time and effort
> just in dealing with various OS's graphic subsystem complexities.
> Doing things in libdraw, I would guess, not win the "flashy-eye-candy"
> contest; but if that is not what you're aiming at, it is okay.
Offer people clean, fast libraries and code in general will be improved.
"Saving" or "rescuing" Plan 9? The basic benefits of Plan 9 seem to be for
the programmer, or for specialized purposes like distributed (flames to
/dev/null). The guy who uses my program probably likes WinXP because it
"handles multimedia better than previous versions". *I* want to use Plan 9
because it "lets me do what I want to without getting in my way". Hence,
the ports.
--Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-17 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-17 15:20 mirtchov
2003-10-17 16:34 ` Skip Tavakkolian
2003-10-17 17:08 ` Joel Salomon [this message]
2003-10-17 18:55 ` Brantley Coile
2003-10-17 19:05 ` matt
2003-10-17 20:17 ` ron minnich
2003-10-17 20:20 ` Christopher Nielsen
2003-10-17 20:26 ` Brantley Coile
2003-10-17 20:41 ` Charles Forsyth
2003-10-17 20:54 ` Brantley Coile
2003-10-20 10:33 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2003-10-20 16:03 ` Skip Tavakkolian
2003-10-21 6:07 ` Adrian Tritschler
2003-10-17 22:18 ` ron minnich
2003-10-20 1:38 ` okamoto
2003-10-17 21:36 ` Roman Shaposhnick
2003-10-20 10:33 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2003-10-21 0:10 ` [9fans] Re: your mail Roman Shaposhnick
2003-10-17 23:38 ` [9fans] porting from vs. porting to Plan 9 Geoff Collyer
2003-10-18 1:21 ` bs
2003-10-21 10:14 ` Martin C.Atkins
2003-10-18 8:27 ` Charles Forsyth
2003-10-18 8:48 ` Richard Miller
2003-10-18 11:09 ` Geoff Collyer
2003-10-18 13:09 ` Tristan Seligmann
2003-10-19 8:25 ` C H Forsyth
2003-10-20 3:28 ` mirtchov
2003-10-20 7:04 ` Tristan Seligmann
2003-10-20 17:17 ` mirtchov
2003-10-20 10:35 ` Patrick R. Wade
2003-10-21 1:14 ` david parsons
2003-10-19 16:27 ` Charles Forsyth
2003-10-20 10:35 ` bs
2003-10-18 19:19 ` Richard Miller
2003-10-19 15:10 ` I RATTAN
2003-10-19 15:54 ` Richard Miller
2003-10-20 14:03 ` ron minnich
2003-10-20 17:03 ` jmk
2003-10-20 21:40 ` splite
2003-10-17 16:43 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-10-17 17:01 ` Fco.J.Ballesteros
2003-10-17 20:17 ` Christopher Nielsen
2003-10-20 10:33 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2003-10-17 15:36 steve-simon
2003-10-17 16:05 Richard C Bilson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2621.199.98.16.93.1066410500.squirrel@wish \
--to=salomo3@cooper.edu \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).