Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!sdcrdcf!trwrb!scgvaxd!ashtate!dbase!drc
From: drc@dbase.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: MPW C, MPW Pascal, LSP and LSC compatibility
Message-ID: <264@dbase.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Nov-87 09:17:08 EST
Article-I.D.: dbase.264
Posted: Tue Nov 17 09:17:08 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Nov-87 23:33:00 EST
References: <199@scdpyr.UUCP> <3161@husc6.UUCP> <1974@dasys1.UUCP>
Organization: Ashton Tate Development Center Glendale Cal.
Lines: 47

In article <1974@dasys1.UUCP>, raylau@dasys1.UUCP (Raymond Lau) writes:
> I don't have MPW, so the following may sound silly:
> Why can LSC use MPW Pascal code and not MPW C code?  Doesn't MPW Pascal
> and MPW C both compile to MPW's .o file format?  If so, I don't recall
> seeing a .o converter for LSC...though I know it exists for LSP.

It might have something to do with the fact that LSC has built-in support for
the ToolBox (Pascal) routines via the Pascal keyword before a function.  This
is the signal for LSC to treat the parameters, etc. per the Pascal conventions.
MPW C has different conventions.  I would think though, that with a .oConverter
one would be able to use MPW C objects.

> 
> While on the subject of compatability, why didn't THINK make a utility to
> convert libraries, or even projects, between LSP and LSC?  (if not make
> them compatable-which, I guess, will remove some features in each prgm.)
> What about a LSC=>MPW .o converter too?  (and LSP too)

Yeah! That's the ticket.  Get the LSC editor and the LSP debugging into one
environment.  That way, I could use LSP without swearing at the !@#*$% editor
every time I wanted to edit some existing source and could use LSC with some
good source level debugging.
I agree that it would be nice to be able to extract objects from LightSpeed for
use with MPW, but it is probably unrealistic in a business sense to expect a
company to provide a convenient path AWAY from their product to another one.
It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to provide a way to import files
from other environments for use in their own, Think (Symantec, now?) has done
this with the rel and .o converters.

> 
> We have a .Rel=>LSC and .Rel=>LSP converter, what about the reverse?

Why, does anybody still use .rel format (other than Consulair and TML)? :=)

> 
> Sometimes I find it helpful to have the ability to share object code w/others..
You aren't the only one.  That's why most of my work is done in MPW.  Being an
Apple product and having published its formats, it has the best chance of 
becoming a standard.


Dennis Cohen
Ashton-Tate Glendale Development Center
dBASE Mac Development Team
--------------------------
Disclaimer:  I say what _I_ think, not what my employers think (I don't ask
them!).