Subject: Re: application architecture for UI (Ex: Re: Is LISP dying?) From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 1999/07/25 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * firstname.lastname@example.org (Rainer Joswig) | How do you know people don't use CLIM for their design and abstract work? I'm asking _you_, Rainer, because the incessant whining strongly implies that if you can't have it all (for free, to boot), you can't use _any_ of it, which I have learned to recognize as the identifying mark of losers. your getting so damn defensive about all this keeps telling me something about CLIM that I really didn't want to know. in less than a week, most of which was spent nosediving into manuals and specifications, I implemented a very small Emacs read-eval-redisplay loop and multiple buffers and a bunch of non-trivial stuff, which used CLIM to update the display automagically and all. I found that CLIM made a whole lot of stuff real easy, that it caused an enormous amount of X traffic, that its redisplay code was horribly slow, and I needed to get below CLIM to get control of the stuff that an Emacs would need. it couldn't cover my needs and disappointed me greatly, but I readily admit that Emacs is a bad test case and that I didn't have a chance to play much with it at the time. now that Franz Inc supports CLIM for Linux, maybe I can get back to play with it, but it seems to depend very heavily on a particular MOTIF implementation (even though I have full access to the entire MOTIF source base, I never got building it for Linux to complete successfully). #:Erik -- suppose we blasted all politicians into space. would the SETI project find even one of them?