From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <891a5377ff1da1ded27bab5ab4906895@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Evolving rio / GUI development
From: Kenji Okamoto <okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:24:36 +0900
In-Reply-To: <8c029c990502160945781f293d@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 498247ca-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> Where will rio (or it's successors) end up going?
>=20
> What does everybody else think about this?

Rio is aimed just to devide the whole window to some smaller ones,=20
and multiplex the keyboard/mouse events for the focused window. =20
That's all I believe.
There are some other neat things in rio, however, I suppose it's just for
minimum.

Then how to make GUI programs for Plan 9?
I think this is still open to everyone.
Why? probably, rob had no time or got older?=E2=98=BA

We have control library (control(2)), however, I think there is no good
consensus that it's should be the upper level GUI library for Plan 9.
(Sorry Sape, I'm not abusing you. _o_)
Regarding this, look at inferno which has the GUI developed in the same
laboratory, and uses one button GUI interface (Tk) different from that of=
 acme.  =20
When I saw it first, I thought they probably had no enough time to make=20
completely new GUI scheme, however, now, I believe that they believed=20
it's enough!   I don't think its enough though...

In short, we have no good agreement regarding what should be the Plan 9=20
GUI programming and/or user interface, I believe.

Young and talented programmer can try this, however, it must be painful
and brain consuming thing I think.   First of all, they have to forget an=
y
existing GUI scheme.=E2=98=BA

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Kenji