Talk:CodeWarrior

message: CW Pascal had focus till +/- MacOS 8.  Classic Mac had huge parts of Pascal in it.
:C interfaces were the norm since about 1989. Pascal interfaces were still maintained, but primarily Apple released C headers (Universal headers). All APIs used pascal calling conventions so they could be used from either language, and the C compiler was modified to recognise the PASCAL keyword and reorder function parameters accordingly. Certainly the Mac was programmed with Pascal conventions in mind in the early days, but in fact most of the actual OS code was hand-written assembler, using Pascal calling conventions. Later OS code was written in C and C++, using Pascal calling conventions so that Pascal users could still access it. The OS contained no "Pascal" at all, since that refers to source code. The object code was always 68000 machine code (on classic Mac) whatever the source code.Graham 02:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I can neither confirm nor deny, what is your source for the "no Pascal at all" claim? Stan 05:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, what I mean is that the OS doesn't have any Pascal "in it", which is what was claimed - it only "contains" machine code. No doubt some parts of it were written using a Pascal compiler, via the Lisa Workshop, though from reading Andy Hertzfeld's stories, and looking at some of the source code that Apple did release (the original WDEFs and I think CDEFs were actually released to developers as assembly source), the hand-written assembler claim is definitely true for significant parts of the OS. This might sound like hair-splitting, but if you look at what the original comment says, it says "[the OS] had huge parts of Pascal in it", which is obviously nonsense. Also, personally I stopped using (Turbo) Pascal to develop Mac apps around 1988, and switched over to THINK C. Apple started to release more and more headers as C headers with the Pascal ones supplied but gradually taking a lesser role. I'm not sure how many developers were still using Pascal by, say, 1994, but it can't have been very many. No-one I ever spoke to anyway. This was still very much in the System 7 days so while Pascal was supported, it didn't "have focus", whatever that is intended to mean. Graham 06:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This reminds me of why I've tended to hang back on Mac articles; there is lots to be said about each of your comments, but the published information is thin, and so there's very little concrete with which to replace speculation. Stan 15:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's hard to find sources for this stuff. Especially in 2006. Nevertheless, it is mostly true -- the Mac system software was not written in Pascal. Apple actually did their interfaces in a different format -- I think it was called Interfacer -- which was transformed to C, Pascal and Assembly headers. In the later days, Apple started getting really sloppy about the metadata needed to build the Pascal headers. --Steven Fisher 16:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: CodeWarriors seems to be the preeminent IDE for symbian development. Mathiastck 15:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Err I guess there are more alternatives then I thought :) http://www.forum.nokia.com/main/resources/tools_and_sdks/#cpp Mathiastck 16:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nokia purchased the rights to CodeWarrior for SymbianOS, purchased outright Metrowerk's x86 compiler and 24 Metrowerks staff.  This technology evolved into Carbide.c++, Nokia's current C++ offering.  Carbide.c++ still has the Codewarrior debugger and x86 compiler technology.  75.34.96.94 01:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only IDE for symbian? 

message: :Image:DevCDVolIX-Back.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:DevCDVolIX-Back.jpg

message: :Image:DevCDVolIX-Front.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:DevCDVolIX-Front.jpg

message: The information in this article is years out of date. The software is not available, is it?
XP, Vista, 7, 8 , and 32 or 64 bit? compatible?  Based on some of the comments, the product this refers to is long gone. This fact should be reflected in the article introduction (if I'm correct)173.189.75.50 (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  OBSOLETE? 

message: The article should make some mention of the excellent PowerPlant C++ application framework, which (for me) was a major selling point. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 18:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  PowerPlant