Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-lcc!lll-winken!uunet!munnari!uniwa!vaxa!a_dent
From: a_dent@vaxa.uwa.oz (Andy Dent, ph: 09 380 2620)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: MacApp questions
Message-ID: <568218@vaxa.uwa.oz>
Date: 28 Mar 89 11:34:24 GMT
References: <568190@vaxa.uwa.oz> <27618@apple.Apple.COM>
Organization: University of Western Australia
Lines: 29

In article <27618@apple.Apple.COM>, keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) writes:
>>1)  What's the speed like on a MacPlus?
> 
> One of the myths about MacApp is that it is a dinosaur (big and slow). While it
> can be considered as large, this is due to the amount of functionality it
> gives you. Also, I wouldn't consider it slow, even on a Mac Plus. Most of the
> time, the timing critical stuff is done in your own source code. Therefore, if
> your MacApp program is slow, it would have been slow anyway.

Sorry, slight misunderstanding here - I have read the comments about application
performance before - I was looking for comments on compile-time/linking.

>>2)  What Pascal's are out there that are compatible with MacApp?
> 
> Both TML and Think have Object Pascals. However, TML's is the closest to
> being able to compile MacApp (I think that only a few changes to the MacApp
> source are needed). Think Pascal 2.0 cannot compile MacApp due to the 
> different ways segmentation is handled. (Rich, if I'm wrong, please correct me)
> 
> Uh, these are both in addition, of course, to MPW Pascal.

If (with a few changes) you can compile and link TML Pascal with MacApp, does
that give you a means of using MacApp without MPW?  (I am rather put off by
the vast cost of MPW.)

General question:

What happened to Object-Oriented Programming for the rest of us 
(ie:  Low-budget/Bright-ideas/Potential-genii)