[Info-vax] openvms and xterm

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 17:05:21 +1200, David Goodwin wrote:

> WSLv1 exists and it does work surprisingly well.

But never quite good enough. And it is now abandoned.

> WSLv2 works better though, and it is no doubt far easier to
> maintain.
> 
> Still not sure what your'e arguing here though. Are you suggesting
> Windows NT should have used a monolithic kernel for some reason?

You tell me: are two monolithic kernels better than one?

> Or that a flexible design was a bad idea because it didn't work out
> perfectly in one scenario over 30 years later?

In the one scenario where it could have achieved something genuinely 
useful, implementing an API which is amply documented and even comes with 
a full open-source reference implementation, it completely failed to 
deliver the goods.