HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 08:20:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.012910.4168@netnews.noc.drexel.edu>,
tjhendry@queen.mcs.drexel.edu (Jonathan Hendry) writes:
>maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
>: 
>
>: How about getting sound out of X-Windows?
>: Ever tried writing X code that handles 24bit images? On my mac I can
>code
>: in one color model that works on all displays. On X I get a choice of 5
>: color models.
>: And what about this fun system of pallette lack of management.
>: OS/2 Windows fares no better in most respects.
>: 
>: Maybe you mean NeXT is better than Mac in these regards---can't say.
>But
>: your implied claim that most UNIX environments are better for
>programmin
>: than Mac is ludicrous. Maybe they're better for character based apps,
>but
>: not for graphical/sound apps.
>: 
>: Maynard Handley
>
>Lets see. On my NeXT, in about 15-20 minutes I can write an App that will
>show
>a rendered object , with sliders to control size and position, rotating,
>and changing color. And just for hoots, I can hook up a print menuitem
>which will send that image to be photorealistically rendered , with the
>task
>split among all the NeXT's on the network.
>
>As for sound, I can create a program which will record and play sound,
>and
>display the graph of the sound in a scrolling view. And I can do it
>without
>writing a single line of code. Total time:two minutes, at most.
>
>I can also write a simple word processor, with fonts, rulers,
>cut/copy/paste,
>and drag+drop color for the text. In about two minutes, without writing
>any
>code.
>
>Beat that on a Mac.

This is a fascinating followup. You will note that my post (in followup to
an earlier post) talks about X-windows. It was based on a claim that most
every GUI for UNIX was a better programming environment than a mac. Since
most everyone of these GUIs is based on X, I discussed X. Now we get this
rabid NeXT type going on a tangent about how great is OS is. Maybe so,
maybe so. But please, dude, in future keep your reply relevant to the
thread, otherwise you only make yourself appear like a nutcase.

Maynard Handley
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jbailey@world.std.com (jim bailey)
Subject: Re: PC, MAC or Amiga?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 02:00:48 GMT

davids@cats.ucsc.edu (Dave Schreiber) writes:


>2.  I hate MPW.  I mean, is it a text editor or a shell?  Or a floor wax?
>The last thing I need is system software with multiple personalities.

OK, so you don't like MPW.  This isn't the same thing as "the Mac doesn't
have a CLI".  I don't like the DOS shell.  It is inconsistent and badly
broken in a lot of ways (some of it was fixed on 5.0 though).  So is it
valid for me to say that the PC doesn't have a CLI shell?

This is the most common misconception I see here.  Repeatedly there
are posts that say the Mac doesn't have a CLI shell.  It would only be
accurate to say the Mac doesn't have a free CLI shell shipped with every
system.  This is a good thing.  If the Mac had shipped with a CLI shell
everyone would have ported bad CPM and DOS programs to the Mac instead
of writing great new software using the Mac Interface.  Without a free
CLI the average user never has to deal with any bad decisions by developers
to use a CL where a windowed interface is more appropriate.  For most
users this is an advantage.

>Dave Schreiber  "Look.  Don't touch."  davids@cats.ucsc.edu (until 6/20/93)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:48:51 GMT

In article 6037@athena.mit.edu, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>In article <21692@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu (David Matthew Putzolu) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan21.020447.24669@athena.mit.edu> Eric M Hermanson,
>>zmonster@athena.mit.edu writes:
>>>>MacOS isn't pre-emptive multitasking, I'll admit that, but it's comming 
>>>>up!  But with all of thsoe things you said about Mac, it was still
>>better 
>>>
>>>If they were to make the MacOS pre-emptive, all the current software
>>would
>>>have to be rewritten to accomodate it.  You will never ever ever see 
>>>pre-emptive multitasking on a Macintosh.
>>
>>Wrongo! There has been a pre-emptive multitasking Macintosh OS
>>around for several years now, that does NOT require any rewritting.
>>It's called A/UX, and it CAN run normal Mac apps pre-emptively.
>>Try to check the facts before you flame.
>
>AU/X will NOT run Macintosh apps preemptively.  Check YOUR facts.

Actually, I believe it does. It merely does not let them pre-empt
each other. They all run as one big nasty task. I think.

It would be better if they could pre-empt each other, and it only works
on very compatible mac apps (none of that low memory stuff now!) but
in theory it is a doable (or rather, done) thing.

>>
>>>>than PCs, becuase the only "OK" current multitasker now on the PC 
>>>>platform is OS/2, forget about windows.  I don't see next capturing a 
>>>>large share of the marketplace anytime soon, and they don't deserve to.
>
>>>It is not next, it is NeXT.
>>
>>NeXT is MUCH better than Windows, and probably better than OS/2.
>>But at several hundred $/copy, it isn't next, it is simply doomed.
>
>If you are referring to NeXTSTEP 486 being too expensive, look at what
>AU/X costs!! If you are crazy enough to pay $700 for AU/X, then it certainly
>would be much wiser to invest the same amount (or less, NeXT has NOT
>released the final cost of NeXTSTEP 486) for NeXTSTEP 486.

Really?

I thought NeXTstep 486 was gonna be like $1000?

What's the current word from NeXT-land?


---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
From: tjhendry@queen.mcs.drexel.edu (Jonathan Hendry)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 28 Jan 93 20:44:32 GMT
Organization: Drexel University, Dept. of Math. and Comp. Sci.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

sbb@panix.com (Steve Baumgarten) writes:

: 
: Unless I'm mistaken -- and please correct me if I'm wrong -- the
: software available for Unix-based systems (including the NeXT) is
: significantly more expensive than similar software available for the
: Mac or Windows systems.  This can add significantly to the total
: system price.
: 

NeXT software is pretty close to Mac software in (list) price. Unfortuately,
we don't have eight million mail order houses competing to give the
lowest price. We only have one (NeXTConnection).

NeXT software is definitely not as expensive as most Unix software.
--
Jonathan W. Hendry
Drexel University College Of Information Studies
Anderson Financial Systems "Programmer-in-Exile" :)
hendryjw@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu (No NEXTMail :( )
<set loose the marmosets!>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 00:47:20 GMT

howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes
>>Question:  Is the Pentium a CISC, CRISC, or RISC chip?                  
>>{CRISC is an intermediate stage between CISC and RISC; as such it is faster
>>then a CISC but not as fast as a true RISC. Its main advantage is that
>>is allows CISC instructions to be used without as much rewriting as a RISC
>>chip requires.}
>Most (At least the PA-RISC, RS/6000, SPARC) have what is called
>microcoding done on a chip level to implement what you described as
>the function of a CRISC.  I have no idea about the P5.  Anyone?
That reminds me: a CRISC chip tends to run hotter than a comparitive
RISC chip but cooler than a comparitive CISC chip.  
It is intresting that Intel is saying that the Pentium is RISC-like
as opposed to saying it is a RISC.  That with the 386 Write-Back 
and the rumor of a heat problem seem to indicate a CRISC chip.
{As I understand it the heat generated in CISC and CRISC chips is
due to the increasing number of instructions that the chips must do on a normal
basis.  A RISC only has to use 20% of its code 80% of the time and therefore
runs much cooler then a comparitivly powered CISC OR CRISC chip.}
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: aggie@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu (I R A Aggie)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Organization: An Ol Ag surrounded by a bunch of unfriendly Seminoles
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 22:50:06 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.193559.21788@athena.mit.edu>, zmonster@athena.mit.edu
(Eric M Hermanson) wrote:

> Whatever happens, NeXTSTEP will run on the  486, 586, and Motorola 680x0 line.
                                              ^^^  ^^^
I'll believe it when I see it running, and I can walk into my computer
shop and order it. Not before.

James
From: bell@apple.com (Mike Bell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:15:17 GMT
Reply-To: bell@apple.com (Mike Bell)
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1993Jan25.001821.28836@netcom.com>, howard@netcom.com (Howard 
Berkey) writes:

> 
> In article <1993Jan23.205949.21863@gallant.apple.com> bell@apple.com (Mike 
Bell) 
> writes:
> >
> >On the Mac, we call it ClarisWorks......
> >
> >
> 
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!   Oh, PLEEZ!!!!!
> 
> Why don't you call Taligent and tell them it's time to move away from
> a doc-centered paradigm because one lame integrated Mac app shares
> document types with several modules within the SAME PROGRAM?
> 
> This is the trailing edge of oop.  NeXTSTEP, Taligent, and others are
> looking at object exportability... the OS managing one program using
> another's object types.
> 
> -H-
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> Howard Berkey						   howard@netcom.com
> 		"I AM the Lizard Queen" - Lisa Simpson
> .... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...    ... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. 
..


It was supposed to be a joke...I just couldn't resist.  The "religious" flame 
wars in this group are getting so out of hand......



 -Mike



********************************************************

Mike Bell										     	       	      email: bell@apple.com
Senior Engineer
68000 High Performance Software Group
MS 60-CS
Apple Computer, Inc.
20525 Mariani Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014

********************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: Masticating Illini, Urbana Illinois
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:27:57 GMT

jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle) writes:

> Yes, the on-board video on the IIci can only handle up to 8 bits per pixel.

> One can add up to two additional monitors, however, which can be of any bit
> depth up to 24 bpp.

Actually, three additional monitors, I would believe.

> The next can't handle multiple monitors, can it?
-- 
Thomas Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  "Behind every argument is someone's ignorance." -- Louis D. Brandeis
From: rterry@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Ray Terry)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:18:53 GMT
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

>No kidding.  All I wanted to do was insert a Quicktime movie of
>my gyrating navel instead of that old "Welcome to Macintosh" line.
>Machine crashed. 
>
>Kaya Bekiroglu - "Don't mind him, he's just crazy"
>kaya@world.std.com

Care to post that movie to the net?  :)

Ray
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:04:13 GMT

In article <21692@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu (David Matthew Putzolu) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.020447.24669@athena.mit.edu> Eric M Hermanson,
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu writes:
>>>MacOS isn't pre-emptive multitasking, I'll admit that, but it's comming 
>>>up!  But with all of thsoe things you said about Mac, it was still
>better 
>>
>>If they were to make the MacOS pre-emptive, all the current software
>would
>>have to be rewritten to accomodate it.  You will never ever ever see 
>>pre-emptive multitasking on a Macintosh.
>
>Wrongo! There has been a pre-emptive multitasking Macintosh OS
>around for several years now, that does NOT require any rewritting.
>It's called A/UX, and it CAN run normal Mac apps pre-emptively.
>Try to check the facts before you flame.

AU/X will NOT run Macintosh apps preemptively.  Check YOUR facts.

>
>>>than PCs, becuase the only "OK" current multitasker now on the PC 
>>>platform is OS/2, forget about windows.  I don't see next capturing a 
>>>large share of the marketplace anytime soon, and they don't deserve to.

>>It is not next, it is NeXT.
>
>NeXT is MUCH better than Windows, and probably better than OS/2.
>But at several hundred $/copy, it isn't next, it is simply doomed.

If you are referring to NeXTSTEP 486 being too expensive, look at what
AU/X costs!! If you are crazy enough to pay $700 for AU/X, then it certainly
would be much wiser to invest the same amount (or less, NeXT has NOT
released the final cost of NeXTSTEP 486) for NeXTSTEP 486.

Eric
From: panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio)
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Summary: Multiplatform sourgrape strikes again!
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 19:42:51 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

In article <bk140-200193132750@kip-sn-98.dartmouth.edu> bk140@cleveland.freenet.edu (Durian) writes:

>Hi,  I am not an amigahead but I feel like jumping into this mud pond.  :)

Hop right in and join the rest of us pond scum and other lowlife!

8^)

>I think mac heads are becoming more and more like PC heads in the eighties.

Yeah, although they probably still use both sides of their brains
instead of their large intestines. I have played with all sorts
of microcomputers since the '70's, and if I had unlimited sums of
money, I'd probably have a NeXTdimension Turbo, a Sun SPARC10/54,
a Silicon Graphics IRIS Crimson with the Reality Engine, a Mac
Quadra 950 stuffed with Rocket 33's, an IBM RS/6000 Model 560H,
an HP-Apollo 755, an Amiga 3000T, a Compaq Deskpro 66M, and just
to give the mail-order people equal time, a GateWay 2000 D66VE,
with a Number Nine 9GXe video accelerator. Any generous donors?

I know what you're thinking -- get a life. Hey, I got one. I just
have a serious case of hardware lust is all. (I need help, yeah).

>Not knowing much about other computers and their capabilities, they just
>like to kick others for fun.  You know, when you get hostile towards some
>particular groups, that means deep inside you have some hidden fear that 
>you don't want to admit.  :-)

Kind of like "My brother is bigger than your brother!" isn't it?
(Yeah, but your brother picks his nose and farts and....)  8^)

>There sure are problems with macs, same with other computers.  Let's don't
>start another war of mac  vs. amigas.  Just pick what you want and live
>with it.  Even if you pick the wrong thing, stick with it until
>you have the $$$ to buy another one.   :)

Or better yet, avoid buying a computer altogether and just get
your employer to get you what you want...(doesn't always work).

>From a pseudo-Artic town in New Hampshire.

Can't be any worse than the -30 weather we had a few weeks ago!

Victor
The Multiplatform SourGrape
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
From: D4887@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Advanced Comm Eng, G G Apple,PRT)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re: Record -> Struct
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:29:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway


 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>'(myRec)->HNo = "\p"' doesn't work. I get told that I can't assign a constant
>to a variable. I've tried using combinations of CStr255, but to no avail.
 
 
   I think you could probably use CStr31 which is a CString.  BTW, don't get
confused by the name -- a "CString" is a Pascal string.
 
    Having just done a XCMD interface for a MacApp program (not starting from
scratch, but from a version in Think C and assembly), handling all the
callbacks was a major exercise in every possible string type and conversion
technique.  When you give the string initialization, dont use the "\p".  I
think the CString constructor will convert it properly,
 
G. Gordon Apple  D4887
 
P.S.  I don't guarantee this answer.  A lot of that XCMD callback string
handling was determmined emperically, by guess and by golly.
From: D4161@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Adept, John DiBiasi,PAS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re: E.T.O. #9 media problem?
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:58:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway

There may be truth in the fact that the CD Drive is the culprit. However, I
also use the drive frequently with the Developer CD's without a problem. In
fact, I often interchange the ETO and the latest developer CD (developer notes)
and have only experienced a problem with ETO 9. Never any earlier CD's.
 
Once ETO 10 has shipped in a few weeks, I would like to see how that CD
responds. If there's still a problem then it's probably the drive, if not...
 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
From: lasleyse@wam.umd.edu (Scott E. Lasley)
Subject: MacApp 301 bug report
Keywords: MacApp 301
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: um
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:13:44 GMT

Will the recently completed MacApp 3 bug report be incorporated into
a Tech Note?  If not, can it be placed at an ftp site so that people
without applelink accounts can access it?

thanks,

scott lasley   lasleyse@wam.umd.edu  or UMDSPA::LASLEY
From: JOHN.OLSEN@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Olsen, John D,APD)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: MacApp Reference is great
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:38:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway

Hi folx,
 
Just got my copy of the "MacApp Reference".
 
The listened to most of the comments we made at last years MADA and produced
what we asked for. I am personally _VERY_ pleased with what they produced. Most
importantly it is in a _USABLE_ form factor (i.e., spiral bound flip book).
 
For thos that have not ordered I would suggest that they do so now.
 
Good work guys! I hope you are listening.
 
John.Olsen
From: DIGIMATCH@AppleLink.Apple.COM (3M, Ran Bedekar,PRT)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re: Buzzwords & MENUs
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:01:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway

Dave,
I suspect that your problem was due to a menu ID (i.e., the one in the menu
resource, NOT the resource ID) that was out of sync with the menu's resource
ID.  MacApp tends to use the two interchangably, so if your menu IDs are not
the same as your menu's resource IDs you will run into problems.
Specifically in your case, I suspect that your MENU #2001 resource had a menu
ID of 128 (the ResEdit default).  This could cause it to be returned by
gMenuTable->GetMenu in the place of CMNU #128 (MacApp's buzzword menu).
If you change your menu's resource ID in ResEdit when the menu is open, ResEdit
will ask if you also want to change the menu ID.  However, if the menu is
closed, you can change the resource ID without a peep about the menu ID.
You can examine the menu ID using ResEdit's 'MENU' menu when your menu is open.
 
Regards,
Nick Nallick
From: HARRIS.BILL@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Harris, Bill)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re2: Is the _MacApp_Class_&_Me
Date: 21 Jan 93 19:19:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway

The MacApp Class and Method Reference (paper version) is a separate product and
is not included in the ETO series. You have to order it from APDA instead.
 
Bill Harris
MacApp/Bedrock Documentation
From: MADA@AppleLink.Apple.COM (MADA Admin, Steve Mann,PAS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Job Listings
Date: 27 Jan 93 00:42:00 GMT
Organization: AppleLink Gateway

MADA MAKES NO WARRANTIES ABOUT THESE JOB LISTINGS OR THESE RECRUITERS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A South Bay company is looking for 4 C++ Software Engineers for a complex
vertical market application that has full-motion video and sound for the Mac
and Windows. Requirements include solid skills in a tool comparable to MacApp,
Think Class Libraries, or Bedrock. Two or more years C++, BS degree preferred.
Contact Maria Ekizian at 408/738-8440, 408/730-1042 (fax), or
71774,3011@compuserve.com.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum Resources has an immediate opening for a Mac programmer with 3+ years
experience with C and at least 6 months experience with MacApp. This position
is located in Miami and has excellent benefits. Contact Marti Barenburg at
800/548-6462 or 407/622-9077 (fax).
 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
From: urban@yoda.fsl.noaa.gov (Art Urban)
Subject: Re: MacApp Castaways & Prograp
Organization: Forecast Systems Lab, NOAA, Boulder CO, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:08:26 GMT

Prograph does not have a rich enough set of classes to even come *close* to
replacing MacApp or TCL for that matter. Folks familiar with the rich set
of classes will be sorely disappointed at what they have to pull off in
order to make simple changes. Most classses have about six methods for
customization. I *think* there is something like 20 or so classes set up
for you, and you usually have to overshadow *huge* amounts of code to
effect a simple behaviorial change. I can't recommend Prograph in its
current version, but I have true hope for this package.

In a nut shell, when the "wow factor" wears off, there isn't much of a
development enviroment left, and you'd be better of protoyping with it.

Sorry TGS folks, I truely do like your product, but you have to be at least
as useful as Think C and the TCL...


-- 
Art Urban 					        urban@yoda.fsl.noaa.gov
===============================================================================
 "Look, he's being attacked by creamy nugget centers."		 	 -Joel
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
From: lsr@taligent.com (Larry Rosenstein)
Subject: Re: C++ (was re: bedrock defection
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Organization: Taligent, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:10:17 GMT

In article <727841301.8123714@AppleLink.Apple.COM>,
ALANDAIL@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Personal Software, Alan Dail,PRT) wrote:
> 
> that C++ is better than C).  For example, anywhere you can use a ==, you can

You're right about this, and I haven't considered these issues.  The == vs.
= problem is a flaw that C++ inherits from C.  The same is true of switch
statements (where leaving out the break in each case is usually a mistake).

As someone mentioned, MPW C++ does warn you about some of these things, and
a better compiler would do a better job of warning you.

> like having various features clash when used together or having the wrong

I think there's a tradeoff here.  You could remove lots of features from
the language, but then there would be useful things that you couldn't do. 
For example, removing stack-based objects would simplify things
considerably, but stack-based objects are useful in many places.

One of the premises behind my MADA Conference talk on C++ is that if you
develop some "rules of thumb" (or "idioms" as James Coplien describes them)
for using C++ then it's much easier to deal with the language.

> defaults when using features (why isn't virtual the default?).  It's a shame

C++ was designed for maximum performance.

Larry Rosenstein
Taligent, Inc.

lsr@taligent.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3