HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: vautrave@disun19.epfl.ch (Pieric Vautravers)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re: Future of MacApp
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:20:47 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne

In article <werner-171192103823@128.32.157.31>, werner@soe.berkeley.edu (John Werner) writes:
: Most of the former
: MacApp team is now working on "Bedrock", a new class library being jointly
: developed by Apple and Symantec (makers of Think C).  Bedrock is supposed
: to be a multi-platform, and will run on (at least) Windows.  Apple has said
: there will be some sort of migration path from MacApp to Bedrock, but I
: don't know any details.

But where can we find information about "Bedrock" ??
When shoud be "Bedrock" available ?
	
			
			Pieric VAUTRAVERS



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pieric Vautravers
vautrave@di.epfl.ch

			"Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas..."
				
				Virgile ( Georgiques, II,489 )

---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nick@sw.stratus.com (Nicolas Tamburri)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Date: 17 Nov 92 14:00:13 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: osa.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov17.122020.6140@reed.edu>, yeung@reed.edu (Woodrow Yeung) writes:
> In article <1eab2mINNild@agate.berkeley.edu> jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu (John S
> >
> > My question: what are the relative merits of OO languages available
> > for the Mac. Indeed, what are the languages available? I know of C++
> > and SmallTalk, and few others. I'm sure I don't know of all of them.
> 
> [Lots of language descriptions delited.]
> 
> Woody Yeung
> yeung@reed.edu

Yerk, and its close relative Mops, are 2 Forth based OOLs. Don't let the names
scare you, they are fairly nice packages, and both trace their roots, (i.e.
they had to be renamed to avoid legal conflicts,) to the once commercially
available language Neon.  They are available by ftp from oddjob.uchicago.edu,
with docs.

Does anyone know if Oberon has object orientation?  Any opinion on whether it is
worth downloading in either case?  Reply to me if it doesn't fit into this group's
charter.  Thanks.

								/nt
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: lhp@daimi.aau.dk (Lasse Hiller|e Petersen)
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 22:57:10 GMT

knapp@cs.purdue.edu (Edgar Knapp) writes:

>In article <1eab2mINNild@agate.berkeley.edu> jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu (John S. Jacob) writes:

>>My question: what are the relative merits of OO languages available
>>for the Mac. Indeed, what are the languages available? I know of C++
>>and SmallTalk, and few others. I'm sure I don't know of all of them.

>Try out MacOberon, a free implementation of Oberon for the Mac. Oberon
>is well suited as a language to learn about Object Orientation, since
>it focuses on the essentials. The book "Programming in Oberon" by
>Reiser and Wirth (Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-56543-9) is exceptionally
>well written. The Oberon distribution itself contains substantial
>documentation as well.

>MacOberon is available from neptune.ethz.ch in directory Oberon. 

>The only caveat I have: MacOberon will not run with AutoDoubler
>installed. I will keep bugging Fifth Generation Systems about that,
>though.

Is it really fair to call MacOberon a OOP language for Mac?
I'd rather describe it as something like Soft-PC, giving you a virtual
Oberon machine, totally different from anything you know about the Mac.

(I looked at it, and dumped it, mainly because of that.)

One other OOP language that deserves mentioning, is Beta. Beta is a new
language being developed at Nordic universities in the Mjolner project.
(Contact mjolner@mjolner.dk for information.)
Beta is a compiler for the MPW-environment. It uses a strong and elegant
abstraction mechanism, called a "pattern" that joins classes and procedures.
(While this is admittedly elegant, I find it extremistic and of questionable
value.)

At Information&Media Science, we have been using Beta in an introductory
programming course for three years now. In my opinion Beta is not suited
for this role, as the compiler is clumsy and slow, generating huge code.

Would someone please implement Eiffel, preferably in a package comparable
to Think Pascal? Please?

--
Lasse Hiller|e Petersen -lhp@daimi.aau.dk / "I AM THE CRAWLY CATERPILLAR, WHO
lassehp@imv.aau.dk- Info.&Media Science  / IS THE COCOON, WHO IS THE BUTTERFLY,
Aarhus University, DENMARK              / ALL AT ONCE. RIGHT NOW." -Vaughn Bode
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: jimlynch@netcom.com (Jim Lynch)
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:49:42 GMT

Well, there's Think C and Pascal, Symantec also has Zortech C++ and is
working on Bedrock, a cross-platform class library; on the MPW (Apple's
Macintosh Programmer's Workshop) side, there's C++, Object Pascal, Lisp
(I think) and maybe Modula. I'm gonna try to port the Free Software
Foundation's C, C++ and Objective-C compiler to the mac but I haven't
got it exactly right on my UNIX dialup yet. FSF is currently boycotting
Apple, Lotus and Xerox products, as well as any other look-and-feel
copyright plaintiffs (any who claim that a user interface can be
copywritten), so I have my work cut out for me.

Back to commercial products -- The think product is inexpensive, however
I feel that Symantec should be using it to develop products, on the other
hand MPW is VERY expensive but Apple _is_ using it to develop products,
and they are making improvements and other changes mainly in response to
their own needs but also, to a limited degree in response to mac developers
with Apple Partner status (costs $600/year, you can only get this if you're
another Aldus or other very large developer with substantial products out
in the mac market.

Another eventual 'must-have' is the Jasik Debugger. This monster displays
lines of your source code whether you have Think or MPW and the language
can be any of C, Pascal or Modula, and it tells you the very machine 
_instruction_ that causes the problem, whether you have a divide by zero
or a heap corruption problem. Use this for about-to-release software to
locate hard-to-find memory leakages and other problems having to do with
memory allocation.
From: jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu (John S. Jacob)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Dylan info (FAQ excerpt)
Date: 18 Nov 1992 01:18:14 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu


In a reply to my original question regarding oop implementation for
the Mac, someone (I'm sorry!) mentioned Dylan, Apple's recent
development. I remembered that I have some info about it, so I am
posting it here for your perusal.

It's only a little bit, but it tells you where to go for more.

----------------------

Dylan(tm) FAQ October 27, 1992

This memo answers questions which are frequently asked about the Dylan
programming language.

The latest version of this memo is available by anonymous ftp from
cambridge.apple.com in the file /pub/dylan/dylan-faq.txt. We expect to
make other Dylan documents available for ftp from the same directory.

Changes in the latest version of the FAQ are marked by the string
'+++'.

The Dylan manual is not available in electronic form, but a bound copy
may be requested by sending your name and address to
dylan-manual-request@cambridge.apple.com.  (+++ Applelink users should
send to dylan-request@cambridge.apple.com@internet#.)  As of this
writing, there is no charge for the manual.

--
  [======== John S. Jacob ========]
  |   jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu   |---- Address --------+
  | BITNET: jsjacob@ucbocf.bitnet | Foothill 7B45B      |
  +-------------------------------+ 2700 Hearst Ave     |
         Colon.                 |   Berkeley CA 94709   |
                 I win!         +-----------------------+
From: nick@sw.stratus.com (Nicolas Tamburri)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:13:19 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: osa.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov20.020144.4110@selway.umt.edu>, ogd@selway.umt.edu (ozymandias G desiderata) writes:
> What, exactly are the differences between Yerk and MOPS? The manual
> sorta said, but it mostly seemed to be identical to the Yerk manual.

The difference is mostly under the hood:  Yerk compiles tokens which are then
interpreted at runtime (indirect threading).  Mops compiles subroutine calls to
primitives (JSR threading,) and augments this by being able to compile machine
code inline when directed to do so and JSRs for longer ones.  It also does a
good bit of optimization  The result is that Mops is much faster than Yerk,
but Yerk can make it much easier to decompile and debug most routines.

									/nt
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: gschwarz@dcc.uchile.cl (Guillermo Schwarz Utrup (Coto))
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Originator: gschwarz@dcc.uchile.cl
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:13:05 GMT
Organization: Universidad de Chile, Depto. de Ciencias de la Computacion


Is there any Beta compiler for free (shareware, freeware or something like that)?
I want one for UNIX or DOS, if possible. If not, forget it.
-- 
     _                           When I ear, I forget.
 _  (_   _ |_        _    _ _    When I see, I remember.
(_)  _) (_ | | \/\/ (_)\ |  _)   When I do, I understand. -- Chineese Proverb.
  )                          )
From: uekleinf@mcs.Drexel.edu (Erik Kleinfelder)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:39:26 GMT
Organization: Drexel University

>>>>> On 17 Nov 92 12:20:20 GMT, yeung@reed.edu (Woodrow Yeung) said:

[much deleted...]

>> Anyone seen Objective C on the Mac?

If anyone knows about this, I would very much be interested too.  Even if it
is only in the basic development phases.

>> Woody Yeung
>> yeung@reed.edu

Erik
uekleinf@mcs.drexel.edu
From: werner@soe.berkeley.edu (John Werner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Date: 17 Nov 1992 18:02:54 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley School of Education
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.32.157.31

In article <1eab2mINNild@agate.berkeley.edu>, jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu
(John S. Jacob) wrote:
> My question: what are the relative merits of OO languages available
> for the Mac. Indeed, what are the languages available? I know of C++
> and SmallTalk, and few others. I'm sure I don't know of all of them.

Which language you use is mostly a matter of personal preference and
pragmatic considerations.  You'll probably be better off if you try to
learn object oriented desigh/programming in general, using whatever
language you want (or multiple languages), rather than just learning C++ or
SmallTalk or whatever.

I use C++ myself: partially because I used to use C, partially because I
like some of the powerful features like constructors, destructors, and
operator overloading, and partially because I use MacApp.  One warning: if
you learn C++ with a recent book and a good compiler, switching to Apple's
MPW C++ will be painful: there are no templates or exception handling. 
Maybe the rumored Think C++ will fix this.

--
John Werner                         werner@soe.berkeley.edu
UC Berkeley School of Education     510-642-9651
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: lhp@daimi.aau.dk (Lasse Hiller|e Petersen)
Subject: Re: MacOberon (was: Q: What's your opinion?)
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 05:58:22 GMT

knapp@cs.purdue.edu (Edgar Knapp) writes:

>In article <1992Nov17.225710.4025@daimi.aau.dk> lhp@daimi.aau.dk (Lasse Hiller|e Petersen) writes:

>>Is it really fair to call MacOberon a OOP language for Mac?
>>I'd rather describe it as something like Soft-PC, giving you a virtual
>>Oberon machine, totally different from anything you know about the Mac.
>>
>>(I looked at it, and dumped it, mainly because of that.)

>Oberon is a language supporting inheritance, type extensions, and
>dynamic binding. It's strong typing extends across module boundaries.
>It's main advantages are simplicity, elegance, and price (free). 

All very nice, but as it doesn't support the Macintosh I couldn't care less.
(As for it being "free": In order to use it efficiently, I'd have to buy:
1. A bigger screen. 2. A Three-button mouse. Quite expensive!)

>A program written in Oberon will run without modifications on Sun, DEC
>and RS600 work stations (and some others). Also, the user interface is
>virtually identical on all those machines.

But it also means that it stinks when it comes to integrating with
other applications on the Macintosh. If I recall my short experience with
it correctly, it didn't even support cut/paste. It did its own graphics,
I doubt if it used QuickDraw even for CopyBits!

It didn't support a multitude of screens, It didn't adapt to a standard 13"
RGB screen, so it was a pain to even try to use.
It usurped the whole screen, making it nearly impossible to use MultiFinder.

>What it being different has to do with whether or not it is object
>oriented I fail to comprehend, however.

I did not dispute that Oberon is an OOP language. However, if it can be
called a Macintosh OOP language, then any OOP language running on MS-DOS
could be so, as they can run under Soft-PC. This way they'd even
support cut/paste in a way. At least better than "Mac"Oberon.
Oberon may be nice to make Oberon programs with, but I want a Macintosh
language to make Macintosh programs for Macintosh users. (Silly, eh? :-)

An Oberon implementation for MPW, with a good OO framework encapsulating the
toolbox just *might* be worth considering.
--
Lasse Hiller|e Petersen -lhp@daimi.aau.dk / "I AM THE CRAWLY CATERPILLAR, WHO
lassehp@imv.aau.dk- Info.&Media Science  / IS THE COCOON, WHO IS THE BUTTERFLY,
Aarhus University, DENMARK              / ALL AT ONCE. RIGHT NOW." -Vaughn Bode
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:07:54 GMT
Organization: Apple
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc

In article <CGAY.92Nov17165314@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu>,
cgay@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu (Carl L. Gay) wrote:
> Another interesting OO language is Dylan.  Essentially very similar to
> Scheme but with the addition of CLOS.  It's a new language designed by
> the folks at Apple, so presumably there will eventually be an
> implementation for the Mac.

A clarification, the object support in Dylan is not CLOS, even
if it has elements of CLOS.

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
From: paryavi@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: trying to remember...
Date: 17 Nov 1992 11:41:27 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

In article <1992Nov17.162711.4166@umbc3.umbc.edu> gseidman@math14.math.umbc.edu (gseidman@math14.math.umbc.edu) writes:
>I have been trying to remember what it was called, but there was a
>programming utility (pro-something? I don't recall) reviewed in a
>professional math journal. The review was talking about how easy it was,
>since you wrote object-oriented procedures in some sort of editor, then
>linked/called the procedures (objects, whatever.... I don't remember it
>as well as I might) graphically, "bringing the mac GUI to mac programming"
>(I seem to remember it as a quote, but more likely than not it is a
>paraphrase). Does anyone know what this programming environment is
>called (more importantly, how good it is)?
>
>Thanks in advance...
>-gseidman@math14.math.umbc.edu

It is called ProGraph and it is by TGS Systems.


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: olevi@daimi.aau.dk (Ole Villumsen)
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:37:13 GMT

Disclaimer: I am working with some of the people from Mjolner, the company
that sells the Mjolner Beta System, as far as I know the only implementation
of Beta to date. So I'm probably biased on Beta. Still, the following is my
own opinion. I do not expect Mjolner nor Aarhus University to share it.

I have good experience with the Mjolner Beta system. Before I knew it I
was told that learning how to write applications for the Mac would take me
half a year. When I started learning Beta and MacEnv - the Mac application
framework that is part of the Mjolner BETA system - after 2 weeks I found
I had completed my first small Mac application.

lhp@daimi.aau.dk (Lasse Hiller|e Petersen) writes:

...
>One other OOP language that deserves mentioning, is Beta. Beta is a new
>language being developed at Nordic universities in the Mjolner project.
>(Contact mjolner@mjolner.dk for information.)
>Beta is a compiler for the MPW-environment. It uses a strong and elegant
>abstraction mechanism, called a "pattern" that joins classes and procedures.
>(While this is admittedly elegant, I find it extremistic and of questionable
>value.)

Maybe. But when classes and procedures are the same (they're all patterns),
this means that when you have virtual procedures you also have "virtual
classes" (yes!), which have proven to be a useful concept. Using e.g. the
virtual class 'eventHandler' in MacEnv comes in so natural you don't even
think about the fact that you're using a concept that doesn't exist in
other programming languages. Possibly it will some day.

>At Information&Media Science, we have been using Beta in an introductory
>programming course for three years now. In my opinion Beta is not suited
>for this role, as the compiler is clumsy and slow, generating huge code.

The BETA compiler takes too long time to compile, agree. It's being worked
on, so I don't think it will stay that way. They're also working on an
interpreter. That's going to be a nice developer's tool.

Ole
--

 Ole V. Villumsen              
 Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
 ovillumsen@daimi.aau.dk
From: cgay@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu (Carl L. Gay)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Date: 18 Nov 92 00:53:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: sisters.CGAY.92Nov17165314
Reply-To: cgay@cs.uoregon.edu
Organization: CS Dept, University of Oregon


   From: yeung@reed.edu (Woodrow Yeung)
   Date: 17 Nov 92 12:20:20 GMT

   In article <1eab2mINNild@agate.berkeley.edu> jsjacob@soda.berkeley.edu (John S
   >
   > My question: what are the relative merits of OO languages available
   > for the Mac. Indeed, what are the languages available? I know of C++
   > and SmallTalk, and few others. I'm sure I don't know of all of them.

   [deletions]

   Macintosh Common Lisp, another OO extension to Lisp.  Heard lots of good
   things about it, but like SmallTalk not really viable for shrink wrap
   software development.

Not to pick nits or anything, but MCL is not an OO extention of Lisp,
but rather it is an implementation of Common Lisp.  The Common Lisp
standard includes the Common Lisp Object System (CLOS).

Another interesting OO language is Dylan.  Essentially very similar to
Scheme but with the addition of CLOS.  It's a new language designed by
the folks at Apple, so presumably there will eventually be an
implementation for the Mac.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: eric@acis11.tamu.edu (Eric L. Nelson)
Subject: Prograph
Organization: Computer Science, Texas A&M University
Distribution: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:31:37 GMT

ok..lets talk prograph. A group of us here at tamu have started using
prograph for simulation work. So far, we are pretty excited. However,
we are just beginning. What are other peoples experiences?

We have dialed into TGS's bullitin board (which is pretty nice) but
the long distance calls are getting old. 

If we can get enough discussion going, maybe we can start a FAQ and
our own seperate group. So, what else is there to discuss????


eric


--
----------
                                   || Eric L. Nelson (Eric.L.Nelson@tamu.edu)
    _/_/_/_/                       || Research Associate
   _/        _/_/_/    _/  _/_/_/  || Autonoumous Underwater
  _/_/_/    _/   _/   _/  _/   _/  || Vehicle Controller Project
 _/        _/_/_/    _/  _/        || Texas A&M University
_/_/_/_/  _/   _/   _/   _/_/_/    || (409) 845-0085


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
From: dent@DIALix.oz.au (Andrew Dent)
Subject: Re: Q: What's your opinion?
Organization: DIALix Services, Perth, Western Australia
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 13:01:32 GMT

>> Anyone seen Objective C on the Mac?
Objective-C IS available for Mac, with IC-Pack 101 (basic data handling
classes) as a front-end compiler in the MPW environment (the one reason that
stopped me defecting from Think C - I needed a full Application framework
and class library for an application in a hurry).
 
Contact Stepstone on (203) 426 1875, fax 270 0106.
 
Andy Dent (A.D. Software - Mac & VAX programming)
94 Bermuda Dve, BALLAJURA  Western Australia  6066
Phone/Fax: 09 249 2719 (local)  +619 249 2719 (International)
nternet: dent@DIALix.oz.au    Compuserve: 100033,3241