Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site h-sc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!harvard!h-sc1!breuel
From: breuel@h-sc1.UUCP (thomas breuel)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Mac program portability, etc.
Message-ID: <819@h-sc1.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Dec-85 05:25:21 EST
Article-I.D.: h-sc1.819
Posted: Sat Dec  7 05:25:21 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 03:13:34 EST
References: <925@osu-eddie.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center
Lines: 26

> Even with all of the differences between window handling, event handling,
> and the rest of the user interface libaries, you CAN make Mac-style
> programs portable, so that they can be recompiled (or at least easily
> ported) between Macs, Amigas, Atari STs, SUN Workstations, MicroVaxen,
> etc.  The basic idea is what's called modular programming.  Before you
> become nauseous, I'm using this term in a very limited sense:
[...] 
> All it takes is a little skill and self-discipline.  Maybe that's too
> much to ask from hobbyists.  I hope not.
>
> 				Elwell@Ohio-State.CSNET

This goes a bit too far. If you will take the time to come up with a
nice, general programming interface for workstations and implement
library routines for the popular micros, fine. Your efforts will be
greatly appreciated (provided that you produce a functional product and
place it in the public domain; personally, I think that the Macintosh
programming interface can only improve in such an undertaking).

However, I am afraid that you grossly underestimate the amount of time
and effort involved in such a project. Given also that most people
don't even have access to all the machines you mention, you can hardly
expect many Mac programmers to spend much thought on guessing how a
program could be easily ported to, say, an Amiga.

						Thomas.