X-Windows for version 8 GCG, Opinions?

Przemko przemko at reks.uia.ac.be
Fri Jan 20 04:03:52 EST 1995

>>>cut cut cut
Well, I am using (or attempting to) wpi. See, I hate this command line 
interface that asks me eg in pileup to create a special file with names only 
and THEN use it in other programs as @name{*} ? 
In that sense wpi is a lot better. You work not with programs, reloading 
sequence each time but you start with a sequence (or set of them) and apply 
different programs on that. That is great.
Tha program is buggy like hell but it is a first version, so it is fully 
forgivable. For instance, if you want to run it on a smaller screen (14") then 
you have to use a switch -small, otherwise it crashes. It crashes anyway if 
you do too many things (too many windows open etc.), it is memory HUNGRY.
My major dissapointments are following:
-the sequence editor is the same. Someone told me that writing a sequence 
editor is very difficult but since we use X, we possibly could go better. I 
have never learned vi and I would like to avoid it (pico is so much nicer). 
Anyway, why not use features of X and finally DEPART from that VMS style?
- initial menus are very easy (takes a minute to explain it to a novice). But, 
once you get deeper into it, things get more complicated. The people who 
develop wpi shoul look at some Mosaic pages of various DNA/Protein servers. 
Their clarity of design and operation is great, it does not take 4 windows to 
finally see your result and so on (Expasy, ncbi and so on)
- overall impression is good, the product gets on the right tract and 
hopefully, soon we will see it in a NEW, IMPROVED version

Just my 0.02$ worth

More information about the Info-gcg mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net