Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!deimos!unmvax!nmtsun!dksnsr
From: dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dino Khoe)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Programming MS-Windows vs. Amiga (Re: resource tracking)
Message-ID: <3908@nmtsun.nmt.edu>
Date: 7 Mar 90 02:36:00 GMT
References: <1165@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> <5214@sugar.hackercorp.com> <23118@usc.edu> <5219@sugar.hackercorp.com> <23157@usc.edu> <261@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz>
Reply-To: dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dino Khoe)
Organization: New Mexico Tech, Socorro NM
Lines: 22


>>In article <5219@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>3. 99% of the MS-Windows calls use "internal" data structures that you
>>  cannot poke at directly. This is compared to the Amiga system in which
>>  practically everything is "public", even things that shouldn't be (remember
>>  all those IntuitionBase fields that were supposed to be private?).  This
>>  results in less run-time crashes than on the Amiga.  I think this was a real
>>  win for MS-Windows and I wish the Amiga was designed similarly.  We would
>>  have less "hacks" and more stable and crash-free programs.

If this is the case, I'm sure you would love a Mac...  You'll get your fill
of "internal".  Much less try to program the thing...   Are you actually
suggesting that the Amiga Intuition be written like MS-Windows???  If a
programmer can "hack" the Intuition privates, so can they hack an MS-Windows
system, even if it is indirect.  Stop crying, if you really love all the
MS-DOS stuff... go play with it.


-- 
=============================================================================
Dino Khoe 	 		 |	|   | /  \  /\ |/     Any system   
dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu 		 |	|---||____||   |\     can be       
New Mexico Tech Computer Science |	|   ||    | \/ | \    cracked...