Re: [External] : Re: Would there be a drawback of using the same graphical toolkit on every platform?

[Jean Louis]

* Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor 
<help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> [2022-02-21 09:29]:
> But isn't the "lumping" in this context lumping together the
> proprietary Unix systems (e.g. SunOS/Solaris), the Linux
> distros and the BSDs into Unix?

I would not say, I have actually understand you and agree with you
that they are "Unix" though I think it is better to say they are
"Unix-like", and I don't mind it.

> While the splitting is splitting the Unix into "Unix" and
> "Unix-like"?

Of course not only that... There are too many differences to explain
here, it's not subject for Emacs.

> > There is general tendency in Emacs society to go rather
> > towards "splitters" group. Lumpers don't participate much
> > in discussions.
> 
> That comment is so splitter. Why don't you join the lumper's
> camp and get into the game?

If in that camp there are nice people to meet, I will join. I don't
mind what they think or write.

> No, I disagree that is incorrect not to use it, because
> I think that distinctions in the world of technology should be
> made in terms of technology and reflect technology.

And me not, I think in terms of definitions and what companies,
governments, trademarks and thus people forcibly consent to.

And I recognize fully that you can call it as you wish, who cares.

I would not tell to somebody "Just take any Unix like GNU" because it
is not true, and I would not recommend Unix as it is not free software
(that I know). So in that sense for people who read this, not for you,
I was mentioning "Unix-like." Who cares for some if they want this or
that. There is artistic freedom too, freedom of expression.

> What some business dudes piled together in their fancy documents
> shouldn't influence how I, a technology person, refer to
> technology. dig(1)?

Then expect to get into discussions.

As me being from Europe I can see many things what African people
don't see, so I enter into discussions all the time, as I am bringing
some new reality onto them.

> > Do you see this letter A and A? Are they same? They look
> > same but they are not same, as they must be saved in quite
> > different locations by different impulses which are not
> > same.
> 
> Here we see my Lumper instinct, because I think they are
> both A.

They may be both similar to A, though they are never same, because you
said that A and A is equal to A, but it is not really, we stop our
observation of what it is at simple meaning, but as they are in
different space they cannot be equal. Not even those pixels are of
perfectly equal size, and their memory electrons are not in same
place, they are quite distinct to each other, in other words, what you
thought of (eq 'A 'A) ⇒ t is not what is reality.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/