Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!ukc!tcdcs!swift.cs.tcd.ie!maths.tcd.ie!tim
From: tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: THINK C Suggestions
Message-ID: <1990Oct5.151257.26488@maths.tcd.ie>
Date: 5 Oct 90 15:12:57 GMT
References: <1990Sep28.121554.18758@maths.tcd.ie> <61078@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <15524@reed.UUCP> <20912@well.sf.ca.us>
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Lines: 33

In <20912@well.sf.ca.us> gurgle@well.sf.ca.us (Pete Gontier) writes:

>>>Thanks for making such a wonderful tool, and thanks for asking us for
>>>suggestions to make it even more wonderful!
>>
>>Ditto.

>Ditto. This is beginning to sound like a Rush Limbaugh convention. :-)

What I find interesting in this discussion
is that nearly everyone seems to want *more* 'Macky' features,
while I want *less*.
I'd like just to sit at my Mac,
and 'make' a program the same was as on Unix.

Maybe it was pretty clever of Symantec to reasonably satisfy
both sets of clients.
I thought I'd run into problems with big programs in THINK C,
but I haven't done (yet?).
I suppose some day I'll have to get round
to the Toolbox,
but the sheer weight of 'Inside Mac' and 'Mac Revealed'
puts me off.
I do doubt though if it's worth it (for a non-Macnik)
to get into THINK C's classes.
Can I be pretty sure that THINK C will develop into C++,
and that these classes will be still usable then?

-- 

Timothy Murphy  

e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie