rs4u+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU.UUCP (06/04/87)
This is a sampling of the messages I've received on the subject. thanks to all who replied, and my apologies to those of you whose messages I didn't include here... wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu writes: > MPW advantages: 68881 direct support, gaurenteed to be fully functional wit >h all of the mac product line, well integrated editor/shell {someone please make one >for unix- PLEASE!!!!!}, make facility works with all the tools so everything >can be done from one app rather then LSC, LSP, RMAKER. Seems to work much >better then the other avialable compilers (excepting LSC of course), object >pascal support, lots of bunda utilities. jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Joel West) writes: >MPW is definitely worth it if you are working on big projects over >a long period of time. One person, 1 week or less? Maybe not. > >Most developers I know hate MPW for the first 2 weeks, give it >begrudging respect for the next 2 weeks, then swear by it after >that. There are certainly subtle problems in other systems >(like handling large source files, error handling, etc.) that >would cause you to get frustrated very quickly. bills@cca.cca.com (Bill Stackhouse) writes: >The only advantage that MPW might provide is a framework for program >development such that the "right" language can be used for each part >of the program/system. If your building a system that has several >hundred thousand source lines, then it can be an important factor. >With programs that are 5-10K source lines, the overhead of MPW will >overwhelm the benefits. sun!cbosgd!utgpu!mnetor!geac!daveb (Dave Brown) writes: > It good for LARGE projects and programs: the tools save hair-tearing >(esp when trying to "sync" several machines or developing for Mac & Un*x) >and the smaller object saves precious code space. > Slow? Its *pitifull* ! > The shell and "commando" make prototyping easy, though. well!alcmist (Fred Wamsley) writes: >Comparing either Lightspeed language to MPW is like trying to decide >whether a Porsche is better than a Peterbilt. It depends on how much >you want to haul. And another response: >If your application is small enough that multiple segments (and I mean multiple, >not just a few) are not necessary, then your appraisal is accurate. If, on the >other hand, you are creating something very large (our application is over 600K >in size) then LightSpeed will not cut it. The limits it places on how you may >segment, unit by unit rather than procedure by procedure, makes the management >of a huge application almost impossible. >Dennis Cohen >Ashton-Tate Glendale Development Center Based on the messages I've gotten, the consensus is that MPW Pascal (or MPW in general) is better for really big projects, that might require different languages to be used. In addition, MPW provides tools and capabilities (Rez, Object Pascal, for example) that Lightspeed Pascal does not offer. I still prefer the fast turnaround that Lightspeed has to offer. Has anyone had any experience changing gears from Lightspeed Pascal to MPW? What's the best way to do it? --Rich Richard M. Siegel R-Squared Development Systems 134 Horseshoe Drive Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 (804) 229-2152 [After 6pm eastern time only] Arpanet: rs4u@andrew.cmu.edu Uucp: {your fave gateway}!seismo!andrew.cmu.edu!rs4u Disclaimer? I don't even KNOW 'er!