Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bloom-beacon!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!Apple.COM!lsr
From: lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: MacApp
Message-ID: <4310@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 22 Sep 89 18:32:38 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Objects-R-Us,  Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 26
References:<336@castle.ed.ac.uk> <13519@well.UUCP> <6494@columbia.edu> <1478@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <3949@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <60557@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <11104@fluke.COM>

In article <11104@fluke.COM> mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney) writes:
> Because you can't write a non-trivial application unless you spend a 
*large*
> amount of time studying the MacApp source code.  It is certainly 
possible to
> switch back in forth between languages, but at the intimate level of

From my experience, the programmers who have the easiest time with MacApp 
are the ones that don't dive into the souce code right away.  I think it 
is possible to do significant applications with MacApp and not look at the 
MacApp source code.  This is especially true with the latest manuals, 
which include a nice tutorial volume.  (The tutorial goes step by step 
through the design of an icon editor program.)

I agree that it is not pleasant to switch back and forth between 
languages, but that should be necessary only if one encounters a bug in 
MacApp.  We won't know for sure if this is an issue until people start 
using MacApp with C++.  It is unlikely, however, that MacApp will be 
translated into C++, given the effort that would require plus the overhead 
of maintaing parallel versions.

Larry Rosenstein, Apple Computer, Inc.
Object Specialist

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