[Oberon] Re. Blackbox open source available
Douglas G. Danforth
danforth at greenwoodfarm.com
Fri Dec 31 19:05:55 CET 2004
I'll respond once to your comments since I think each of us has their
own preference and saying eat your broccoli just doesn't make it if you
don't like broccoli.
So, I started with Oberon V4 in 1992 and loved the mouse clicks!
However, I never was very good at them since keeping the cursor on the
line and not have it jump to the line above while doing a delete could
be very annoying. I used V4, and S3 for about 5 years until I
discovered BlackBox/Component Pascal. And yes, I agree with you that
the shift from a platform independent look and feel to a platform
dependent one was (at first) a disappointment to me. However, the
number of mouse clicks were greatly reduced with BB/CP and surprisingly
I didn't miss the interclicking. That's one issue.
Overlapping windows, IMHO, are nicer than tiled ones. I understand why
Dr. Wirth used tiling for efficiency.
Pulldown menus greatly reduce the memory load on people and yes you can
do this with V4 and I have many times created a development environment
in unix just so I can executed the unix calls conveniently without
having to type them.
There are too many reasons that are just personal preferences to list
I think I can develop a working program faster in BlackBox/Component
Pascal than I could (in the past) develop one in V4.
easlab at absamail.co.za wrote:
> Doug Danforth wrote:-
>>I like the Blackbox/Component Pascal interface.
> IMO the 'interface' is THE most important aspect of a system.
> That it's not discussed is because the concepts are so fuzzy and
> dificult to quantify. I've concluded that why I feel so comfortable
> [like taking the boxing-gloves off before starting to type] when I
> return-home from having to use Micro$loth or Linux, is n-o's
> Glancing through BlueBottle notes it seems that it aims to ape M$.
> I just can't understand it !!
>>The source code has now
>>been released. I'd be interested in hearing comments about porting that
>>code to the Native Oberon environment. That is, call those functions of
>>native that replace MS Windows calls and still retain the look and feel
>>of Blackbox while running on Native and hence extend the platforms on
>>which Blackbox will run.
> Can you try to describe this 'Blackbox/Component Pascal interface'
> please ?
> Here's my attempt at describing n-o's interface:-
> * cording allows the major actions: load-file, do-command,
> delete/copy/move-text ...etc. to be controlled subconciously
> [by reflex].
> * there is no need to look back-and-forthe between screen & key-board,
> [this aspect is recognised by fighter aircraft HCI, and they spent money
> to get the best] except for "mark" <F1> , which Peter Easthope once
> approriately ask to be included in the cording-vocabulary.
> I.e. except for "mark" <F1>, the key-board is hardly necessary.
> * inputing visually and allowing the rest of the body to react
> instinctively as reflex output is efficient for humans.
> == Chris Glur.
> Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
More information about the Oberon