Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!convex!rosenkra
From: rosenkra@convex.com (William Rosencranz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: GEM source code
Summary: never posted...why not?
Message-ID: <1991Mar21.101741.14347@convex.com>
Date: 21 Mar 91 10:17:41 GMT
Sender: news@convex.com (news access account)
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx.
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: convex1.convex.com


something just dawned on my, so please indulge me for a moment...

of all the source code ever posted here (c.b.a.st), almost all, if not
all is unix-like utilities. i don't recall ever seeing source for gem
programs, even things like gem front ends to archivers. why is this?
i think you could argue that gem applications may become more predominant
if people have examples on which to pattern new things. it is relatively
easy for someone with less experience to write a TOS application since
there is a wealth of examples to choose from. and gem is far more
difficult to program than stdio.

in this regard, i promise to post a real gem application sometime in
the next few months. source included! how 'bout that for trend setting :-)
unfortunately, the last gem appl i wrote was about 60,000 lines, and
i don't think i am going to post that sucker. it was a couple of years
ago at that, so i am a bit rusty. note that of the 60k lines, about 45k
lines of it was user interface. maybe i just answered my own question.
or maybe gem appl authors feel that they should get monetary reward for
their herculean efforts (shareware, nothing wrong with that...) and hence
keep their source close to the vest.

-bill
rosenkra@convex.com
--
Bill Rosenkranz            |UUCP: {uunet,texsun}!convex!c1yankee!rosenkra
Convex Computer Corp.      |ARPA: rosenkra%c1yankee@convex.com