Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:41:42 +0100 (MET) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | [offtopic] Re: If Linux is to succeed |
| |
On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, W. Reilly Cooley wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > most Microsoft APIs are >largely< redundant. Say i've counted 1500 > > different API calls in windows.h ... and that doesnt include new bloat > > like ActiveX, 3D stuff and the networking nightmare called Netbeui and SMB > > over TCP. > > > > Compare this with the 167 Linux system calls. > > You, however, are neglecting that the many Windows API calls are for > graphical manipulation, e.g., InvalidateRect(), MsgBox(), and > ShowWindow(). For this to be an accurate comparison you'd also have to > include the Xlib and perhaps also X Toolkit calls.
pc5829:/usr/X11R6/man/man3$ grep -l 'XLIB FUNCTIONS' * | wc -l 181 pc5829:/usr/X11R6/man/man3$ grep -l 'XT FUNCTIONS' * | wc -l 95
181+95 calls.
But i kindof disagree to talk about X as an OS issue. And X isnt a moving target. 5 years old X code runs just fine. Can you run 5 years old Windows code on NT, without destabilizing the system? Not to talk about performance and usability.
> I think perhaps you are missing the point about supporting the Windows > APIs and such. [...]
i'm just saying that it costs too much, on the developer side. IMHO, lets rather put energy into making better features, than putting energy into upgrading to a newer API and a newer API and a newer API. The amount spent on software doesnt change. But it's up to you where do you put the resources.
-- mingo
|  |