[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: common-lisp@su-ai
- Subject: Terminal operations.
- From: greek@DEC-HUDSON
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 85 09:42:48 EDT
In fact, Symbolics' use of the term "window" is grossly at odds with
its use in the graphics literature, where a window is a (usually)
rectangular region in the world coordinate system which is of interest
to some function (e.g., one which displays it in a viewport on the screen).
I hope we all agree that Common LISP should use the accepted terms
when adding graphics to the language. The terms we use for the
"windowing" portion of the overall graphics facility must not conflict
with the terms in the remainder of the graphics facility. This is one
reason I wonder why there are two separate committees involved here.
I also object to the use of one GRAPHICSOP function. If we are going to
add graphics, then we must decide on the semantics first, then on
the function syntax. In particular, we could stipulate that all
graphics/windowing/text-display functions to in a separate package.
This would help some with the name conflict problem. (oops, that's
"go in a separate...")
Yes, we could wait until ANSII comes out with a standard. On the other
hand, if we're so worried about standards, why didn't we just adopt
an existing standard (e.g., GKS) in the first place?