Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!qantel!lll-lcc!lll-crg!nike!oliveb!hplabs!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: BYTE issue of September 86 focuses on the 68000
Message-ID: <3681@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26-Sep-86 16:14:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: ism780c.3681
Posted: Fri Sep 26 16:14:19 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Sep-86 19:09:33 EDT
References: <3868@ut-ngp.UUCP> <3374@ism780c.UUCP> <15656@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <167@apple.UUCP> <4027@ut-ngp.UUCP> <255@husc6.HARVARD.EDU>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica, CA
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.micro.mac:8002 net.micro.amiga:4985

In article <255@husc6.HARVARD.EDU> hadeishi@husc4.UUCP (mitsuharu hadeishi) writes:
>
>Mac software architecture, although revolutionary in its time, makes
>it MUCH more difficult for old applications to run comfortably in a
>multitasking environment (and much less efficient, since an event loop
>is inherently less efficient than a event-driven task (that uses
>task Wait()ing.))

Not so.  Most Mac applications that don't do things that Apple says not
to do should have no trouble in a multitasking environment.  The main
problems with multitasking on the Mac are in the OS, not the applications.
MultiMac showed that most Mac applications can deal with multitasking.

Also, I don't think that a polled event loop has to be "much less" efficient.
When there is no event for the process, GetNextEvent will just return a
null event.  The process would most likely then just call GetNextEvent
again.  This is less efficient, but not by much.


-- 
What's the difference between a duck?

Tim Smith       USENET: sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim   Compuserve: 72257,3706
		Delphi or GEnie: mnementh