1 |
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:03:14PM +0800, Michael Kohl wrote: |
2 |
> > As for the programming part, in my opinion shell scripts with use of |
3 |
> > "dialog" for the GUI are a good option. |
4 |
> Afer looking at ufed's code I realised that it also uses dialog. But |
5 |
> it's written in Perl. And actually I think that giving the possibility |
6 |
> to write a plug-in for "Emergency" in a variety of languages makes it |
7 |
> more attractive. But still, nothing against the use of dialog (or |
8 |
> Xdialog[1] for a GTK version of "Emergency"). |
9 |
In doing the cleanup work on ufed to get rid of the much reported bugs, |
10 |
myself and another developer found just how limiting dialog is. |
11 |
|
12 |
It would be wonderful if it easily supported multi-modal inputs and |
13 |
other non-binary options, but they are literally a nightmare. |
14 |
|
15 |
If you say it can be done, look at the kernel, I suggest you go and look |
16 |
at the copy of dialog that ships with the kernel. It is a really nasty |
17 |
bit of hacked up code, completely non-extendable. |
18 |
|
19 |
For the future UFED, we full-well realized that it would be best as a |
20 |
core library that has no UI functionality of it's own, and then each UI |
21 |
is written to just use the library. The (n)curses library that a new |
22 |
text mode UI would have needs to have a LOT more features than dialog to |
23 |
be seriously useful. Something like Turbo Vision (the interface style of |
24 |
the original Borland/Turbo Pascal/C, but in Perl or Python would go a |
25 |
long way towards what we would like. Turbo Vision was wonderfully |
26 |
extensible for what it was. |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
30 |
E-Mail : robbat2@××××××××××××××.net |
31 |
Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2 |
32 |
ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 |
33 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |