Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!ucivax!ucla-cs!kona!tj
From: tj@kona.cs.ucla.edu (Tom Johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: THINK C Suggestions
Message-ID: <39560@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 1 Oct 90 19:07:09 GMT
References: <1990Sep24.180828.18625@cs.cmu.edu> <1990Sep28.121554.18758@maths.tcd.ie> <61078@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 27

In article <61078@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> huntley@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Haydn Huntley) writes:
>I've been in love with Think C for three years, but there are a few
>things I'd love even more if they were improved...
>
>4)	Add a command for assembler output, like the command-K
>	function for compile.  That way we can see what kind of code
>	Think C is generating, so that we can decide if we need to
>	optimize it, and so that we have something to begin optimizing
>	with.

Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!
This would be fantastic!

I would also like to be able to compile separate code resources as part
of an Application project.  I often use small assembly language 
routines (ie response routines for Gestalt or the Notification Manager), 
CDEFs, DRVRs etc.. within my applications.  I'd love to be able to specify
that this file (or group of files) should be compiled as type DRVR, for instance
and included in the resource fork of the application.

Thanks--

Tom
--
Tom Johnson      UCLA Computer Science Department 
			3413 Boelter Hall, Los Angeles CA 90024 (213)825-6952
			Internet:  tj@cs.ucla.edu