Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!NAVPGS.BITNET!4526P
From: 4526P@NAVPGS.BITNET ("LT Scott A. Norton, USN")
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Workbench and object-oriented programming (was Re:
 Iconification)
Message-ID: <8801150130.AA18097@jade.berkeley.edu>
Date: 15 Jan 88 01:13:14 GMT
References: <shf@well.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 34

>
>Sounds like there might be some overhead in redundant code in alot of the
>"small programs."  A super-wiz-bang desktop publishing program, for
>example, would have a lot of modules that would have to be included in each
>of the viewer, printer and editor programs.  The editor would have to load
>files, format them, print them (would you really want to start a separate
>program just to print your file?) and display them (it's WYSIWYG, isn't
>it? :-).  The printer would have to load, format and print files.  The
>viewer would have to load, format and display files.

Two observations:

First, this is how WordPerfect's printer works.  It runs as a
separate task, invoked either by the main WP or by the user.  It is
an excellent approach, and doesn't seem to incur too much overhead
from the possibly duplicated code.

Second, and more hopefully, the Amiga shared libraries avoid the
problem of redundant modules.  Just put all the common modules of
the "Big City Desktop Publishing Plus!" program in the
BCDTPP.library.  Except for task overhead, which is small on the
Amiga, the total memory usage will be almost the same if you fire up
all the component modules compared to the original monolithic
program.  And if you only use one of the modules, you save.

>--
>                Stuart Ferguson         (shf@well.UUCP)
>                Action by HAVOC         (shf@Solar.Stanford.EDU)

LT Scott A. Norton, USN
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, CA 93943-5018
4526P@NavPGS.BITNET
4526P@NPS.ARPA ( I think its on line now )