Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!apple!Apple.COM!lsr
From: lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Odd behavior (was Re: List manager and Think C)
Message-ID: <4058@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 7 Sep 89 01:35:17 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Objects-R-Us,  Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 18
References:<5501@viscous.sco.COM> <9389@cadnetix.COM>        <5014@portia.Stanford.EDU> <21813@cup.portal.com> <GARY.89Sep5171125@milo.clarkson.edu>

In article <GARY.89Sep5171125@milo.clarkson.edu> gary@sun.mcs.clarkson.edu 
(Gary Levin) writes:
> This sounds like it might possibly answer why the source for the class
> libraries was included in the sample programs instead of using
[referring to changing method calls to direct JSRs]

In MPW the conversion of method calls to direct JSRs is done in the 
linker, because it requires knowledge of all the methods in the 
application.  The output from the compiler is exactly the same whether the 
optimization is done or not.  As you said, the advantage to doing this is 
that you can distribute libraries without requiring that people use one 
dispatching scheme or another.  

Larry Rosenstein, Apple Computer, Inc.
Object Specialist

Internet: lsr@Apple.com   UUCP: {nsc, sun}!apple!lsr
AppleLink: Rosenstein1