home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Atari Mega Archive 1
/
Atari Mega Archive - Volume 1.iso
/
lists
/
gem
/
l_0399
/
278
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-08-27
|
2KB
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 22:19:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Timothy Miller <millert@undergrad.csee.usf.edu>
Subject: Re: Shortcut Manager
To: gem-list@world.std.com
In-Reply-To: <H.ekK.6PiB9kgorV6@elfhaven.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.87.9406022217.A15733-0100000@undergrad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
On Fri, 3 Jun 1994, Michel Forget wrote:
>
> There are good reasons to have a standard; what if the user wants to get
> underway with a program quickly, with no hassle at all? Also, the
> standard includes things such as block marking, what order modifiers
> should appear in menus, how dialog boxes should react to keys, and how
> the cursor should react to keys. These are not things that can be
> controlled in the SHORTCUT.INF file.
>
> A good argument for having the SHORTCUT.INF file is for people like
> you who HATE ^A -- this way you can change it to anything you want.
> It is also good for people who have broken keys on their keyboards,
> or find a particular combination hard to duplicate (perhaps they have
> short fingers or arthritis).
>
> We need both solutions, I think, instead of one or the other.
>
People have to program this stuff. It's not only more difficult for the
user, but a LOT more difficult for the programmer. I want a standard
that makes sence from the beginning so that I, the developer, do not have
to worry about allowing the user to change things from the bad standard
to something more acceptable.
If it's good and bullet proof to begin with, then there's no point in
worrying about configuration.
Seeing how you people propose this method for handling configurable
shortcuts, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO WASTE MY TIME PROGRAMMING IT. One of
the great things about programming Atari's is the fact that you can GET
STUFF DONE without going through a lot of crap to do it. Compare MIDI on
Atari to MIDI on a Mac... on Atari's it's a BIOS call; on a Mac, it
requires accessing an interface. Compare GEM to Windows... GEM's a LOT
easier to deal with and takes less work to develop a better product. If,
in order to support your standard, I have to go through a lot of work and
headaches, I'm not going to support your standard. I want to write a
good piece of software and not sacrifice good functionality because I had
to spend a lot of time dealing with unnecessary overhead.