| Re: Windows command-line: why not? [message #57364] |
Thu, 06 December 2007 11:40  |
Haje Korth
Messages: 651
Registered: May 1997
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Vince,
ITTVIS has heard the demand for a Windows command line version A LOT. I am
not sure why it does not exist, whether it was technical difficulties or
just historical reasons. From version 1 on vax terminals I remember that the
command line was curcial as there was no support for windows guis.The first
windows version I remember was v2, which came on two 1.44 inch diskettes.
Windows natively supported a gui interface, so there was no need for a
command line version. (and people back then were not screaming loud enough i
guess).
There may be some good news here. Separating the idl process (idl_opserver)
from the DE may have laid the ground work for allowing a command line
version. At least this is what I gathered from comments I received during
the tech preview phase.
we will see,
Haje
"Vince Hradil" <hradilv@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ca12e60e-83ef-4598-8417-45b23a8e8709@v4g2000hsf.googleg roups.com...
> Does anyone know the real reason that there is no windows command-
> line?
> 1-technical difficulties - I'm not that familiar with the windows api
> 2-marketing issues - they want everyone to conform to the IDLDE
> 3-ITT-VIS doesn't perceive a need (maybe they will now)
> 4-Other?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Windows command-line: why not? [message #57416 is a reply to message #57364] |
Fri, 07 December 2007 13:18  |
abraham
Messages: 7
Registered: May 1995
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Dec 6, 12:40 pm, "Haje Korth" <haje.ko...@nospam.jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> Vince,
> ITTVIS has heard the demand for a Windows command line version A LOT. I am
> not sure why it does not exist, whether it was technical difficulties or
> just historical reasons. From version 1 on vax terminals I remember that the
> command line was curcial as there was no support for windows guis.The first
> windows version I remember was v2, which came on two 1.44 inch diskettes.
> Windows natively supported a gui interface, so there was no need for a
> command line version. (and people back then were not screaming loud enough i
> guess).
>
> There may be some good news here. Separating the idl process (idl_opserver)
> from the DE may have laid the ground work for allowing a command line
> version. At least this is what I gathered from comments I received during
> the tech preview phase.
>
> we will see,
> Haje
>
> "Vince Hradil" <hrad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ca12e60e-83ef-4598-8417-45b23a8e8709@v4g2000hsf.googleg roups.com...
>
>> Does anyone know the real reason that there is no windows command-
>> line?
>> 1-technical difficulties - I'm not that familiar with the windows api
>> 2-marketing issues - they want everyone to conform to the IDLDE
>> 3-ITT-VIS doesn't perceive a need (maybe they will now)
>> 4-Other?
If you've been good boys and girls this year, Santa may leave
something in your stocking.
Haje, you surmise correctly. Using the OPS (out-of-process server) to
separate IDL from the front-end gui, has, indeed, opened up many doors
of opportunity.
Abraham
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
