Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!cbmvax!peter From: peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Short Hello World Message-ID: <21779@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 21 May 91 21:20:53 GMT References: <1991May18.172039.7477@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <1991May20.143242.10424@starnet.uucp> Reply-To: peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna) Organization: Commodore-Amiga, Inc. West Chester, PA. Lines: 38 In article mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes: >In article <1991May20.143242.10424@starnet.uucp> sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) writes: > >Sorry, you're wrong. Code written for 2.0 should be using >OpenWindowTagList (or one of the stubs pointing to it), not >OpenWindow. If you are losing any sleep over whether continuing to call OpenWindow() is wrong now that OpenWindowTagList() exists, you're wasting your time. I would tend to believe that (old) OpenWindow() will continue to exist for a long time to come. Just look, on balance, at what it costs to keep (old) OpenWindow() [or OldOpenLibrary()] for that matter: - code space (these are both tiny routines that call the modern replacements) - code complexity (few ROM routines are this simple) - possibility that an application depends on its existence (guaranteed for OpenWindow(), pretty high for OldOpenLibrary()) Benefit to Commodore for removing OpenWindow() or OldOpenLibrary(): NEARLY NONE Cost to Commodore for removing OpenWindow() or OldOpenLibrary(): PRETTY SIGNIFICANT (wantonly breaking existing apps) It doesn't take much to realize that when stuff is made obsolete, it frequently means the new one is better, not that the old one is going away, unless there's some compelling reason. >