Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!boulder!snoopy!wallwey
From: wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows programming in C
Message-ID: <22922@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Date: 29 Jun 90 14:29:28 GMT
References: <118500024@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> <41900010@sunb3> <1990Jun27.163921.2125@chinet.chi.il.us> <1270@media01.UUCP>
Sender: news@boulder.Colorado.EDU
Reply-To: wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM)
Organization: University of Colorado, boulder
Lines: 27

In article <1270@media01.UUCP> pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes:
>The biggest problem seems to be that Microsoft allowed the windows
>developers to specialize the linker and the compiler. 

It's not like MicroSoft had much of a choice.  The reason the linker and
compiler are so much different is because Windows Code is considerably
different, most notably the calls to and from procedures.  This is because
windows is trying to move code around in memory to 
allow more efficient use of memory. (More important in a multitasking
operating system.) 

If you are looking for something that is closer to X and the Macintosh,
look to OS/2 version 2.0 This is were windowing software on the PC gets
rid of its segmentation problems that make Windows and OS/2 ver 1.x so
hard! 

Dean Wallwey


******************************************************************************
*-Dean Wallwey   wallwey@snoopy.colorado.edu  or  wallwey@128.138.238.103    *
*"If people drove cars like they run computers, 5% of the driving populating *
*would die every business day in automobile accidents!"                      *
* #define DISCLAIMER \                                                       *
* The above comments are my own and not necessarly that of my employer or\   *
* school.    grammer, spelling errors, real heavy flames > NULL              *
******************************************************************************