Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!dewey.soe.berkeley.edu!oster
From: oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu (David Phillip Oster)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Prototyper
Message-ID: <28511@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 23 Mar 89 05:57:08 GMT
References: <67@sppy00.UUCP> <169@indri.primate.wisc.edu> <3955@ece-csc.UUCP> <28672@sri-unix.SRI.COM> <13892@duke.cs.duke.edu> <7540@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <9641@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM> <1041@Portia.Stanford.EDU> <28495@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <9136@claris.com>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster)
Distribution: na
Organization: School of Education, UC-Berkeley
Lines: 13

In article <9136@claris.com> drc@claris.com (Dennis Cohen) writes:
>David is only partially correct in his complaints concerning Prototyper.  The
>complaint is valid against version 1.0 of the product, but not 2.0 (the
>currently shipping version).  The level of commentary is left to user
>preference and the 2.0 release does not generate MF-incompatible code.  

No Dennis, I've been working with output of Version 2. It definately
generates code that has a high probability of failing under
multi-finder.  Read my posting! It generates app1Events, and expects to
receive them. This is a definate no-no under multifinder.

I'll concede that comment levels may be under user control, but that isn't
the point.