[comp.windows.interviews] InterViews under DOS???

lottis@cs.washington.edu (Kent David Lottis) (04/12/91)

I know many (most) readers will screech in horror at the very thought,
but has anyone even contemplated porting InterViews to, say, MS-WINDOWS?

For that matter, has anyone ported InterViews to something other than X?

How firmly entrenched is InterViews in X?   Linton claims that the interface
is confined to the few X11* modules. Is this true, or are there fundamental
architectural factors that bind InterViews to X?

Don't laugh too much at my ignorance

============================================================================
Kent Lottis                    lottis@june.cs.washington.edu  [internet]
Computer Science, U. of Washington - Seattle
9015 W. Shorewood Dr.  #571
Mercer Island, WA 98040
(206) 236-0172


From: lottis@cs.washington.edu (Kent David Lottis)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.interviews
Subject: as
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Keywords: 

linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) (04/14/91)

In article <1991Apr11.213307.8460@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, lottis@cs.washington.edu (Kent David Lottis) writes:
|> 
|> but has anyone even contemplated porting InterViews to, say, MS-WINDOWS?
|> 
|> For that matter, has anyone ported InterViews to something other than X?
|> 
|> How firmly entrenched is InterViews in X?   Linton claims that the interface
|> is confined to the few X11* modules. Is this true, or are there fundamental
|> architectural factors that bind InterViews to X?

Would that "architectural factors" were the hardest part of portability.
Anyone attempting a port to DOS will find things like 8-character filenames and
C++ environment compatibility as big a headache (if not bigger) as anything architectural.