Re: [9fans] gtk port

["Artem 'Thomas' Hlushko" <tom@topspin.kiev.ua>]

Hiroki Tamakoshi <hiroki-t@is.aist-nara.ac.jp> wrote:
> Hello,

> Why do you think that is a bad idea?
because this is not plan9 way (see plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/*)

> Why do you push tcl/tk?
because this is better approach in computer system design.
there is power not only in graphics capabilities of tk,
but in philosophy of tcl. systems are made of 'hard'
pieses in c and etc by gluing with tcl and pipes.
it is very close to real unix way (see upe by bwk&pike)

> It is not the problem to choose gtk or tcl/tk.
> My opinion is, from the point of view of the Human-Computer
> Interaction, that Plan 9 should have a potential to establish a good
> GUI for end users. Off course, there could be another solusion than
there are popular oses with drag'n'drop, point'n'click, popup menus'n'windows
they are used by housekeepers, clerks, sales managers and gamers.
but why do so many people think this is only way?
why Human-Computer Interface should be same for nuclear plant operator
or airport dispetcher and for sales manager or housekeeper?

i think plan9 is intended for cs researches, scientists in another fields,
mission-critical applications experts and so. they are primary
interact with computer by program it, order it and ask it.
sometimes they browse web, look at experimental data
and read ps/pdf/dvi then they need graphics interface.
good Human-Computer Interaction for them is close to plan9 one
and is far to gnome.

> porting gtk.
> (and even if porting gtk fail, porting glib is worthwhile, because
> glib is a very useful library.)
plan9 libc very useful too...

at least i don't think tcl/tk very need in plan9
you can create server with filesystem interface
or add some graphical capabilities in rc :)))

there is not only one way to compute!