Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!draken!d88-jwa
From: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Think against MPW interface war (was Re: MPW wish list)
Message-ID: <2931@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 13 Feb 90 11:33:19 GMT
References: <3689@accuvax.nwu.edu> <14112@reed.UUCP> <1046@watserv1.waterloo.edu> <3718@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Reply-To: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 17

In article <3718@accuvax.nwu.edu> jln@acns.nwu.edu (John Norstad) writes:

>As I understand it, one of the reasons is that MPW's linker is much 
>smarter.  For example, it lets you direct individual routines within a 
>single module to different segments, and it eliminates dead code.  I'm not 
>sure about all this, though.

Xcuse me ?  One of the major gripes about the MPW linker last year was
"Why does it include so much dead code ? It should have a "smart link"
as THINK C does" ...

Maybe that has changed, as so many other things.

h+
-- 
   ---  Stay alert !  -  Trust no one !  -  Keep your laser handy !  ---
             h+@nada.kth.se  ==  h+@proxxi.se  ==  Jon Watte
                    longer .sig available on request