Re: launch a program in an arbitrary frame

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se> writes:

>>> some people even felt that way about the then-new
>>> bash shell.
>>
>> X Window and bash are not Emacs.
>
> I can definitely see X being slow then as well as
> today, with graphics always being slow save for spoilt
> kids who run monster machines bought by their affluent
> but absent parents, only so the kids can play moronic
> FPSs and share porn... and besides (with X), that
> interesting but complicated distributed architecture
> won't win any horse races, I reckon. But bash?! For
> a shell to be slow, and to slow down the entire
> system, something has to be seriously wrong. Anyway,
> if there isn't a shell, and no GUI or base window
> system, how do you interact with the system? Or do you
> mean people who thought bash was too slow still had
> the hardware to run a predecessor shell - simply the
> Bourne shell, or perhaps [a]sh?

https://web.stanford.edu/~ouster/cgi-bin/papers/osfaster.pdf

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                 http://www.informatimago.com/
“The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a
dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to
keep the man from touching the equipment.” -- Carl Bass CEO Autodesk