johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu (05/13/91)
Just found the announcement for the Think Pascal 3.02 updater [ on sumex /info-mac/lang/think-pascal-302-updater.hqx, along with a similar updater for Think C 4.05 ]. The accompanying text in the digest posting notes that the 3.02 updater makes Think Pascal "90%" 7.0 compatible, but says nothing about Think C. Pascal supposedly won't work with VM or 32-bit mode. The question: which development system works better under 7.0? Will they both work eventually, or should people starting out go with Think C? Thanks, Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu)
kempkec@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (Christopher Kempke) (05/13/91)
In article <53400@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes: >The accompanying >text in the digest posting notes that the 3.02 updater makes >Think Pascal "90%" 7.0 compatible, but says nothing about Think C. >Pascal supposedly won't work with VM or 32-bit mode. Actually, if you unpack them, they both say the same thing, so presumably they both make the same "mistake" to prevent VirMem /32-bit clean operation. Both supposedly produce 32-bit clean code even if the compilers themselves aren't, so I guess it's back to using whichever compiler you prefer (shucks.) BTW, I installed both patches w/out any problems. THINK needs some congratulations for this fantastically simple method of distributing upgrades. If they'd just make the THINK C debugger look like the THINK Pascal one, and give me _real_ C++, I'd be completely thrilled.... :-) -Chris
siegel@world.std.com (Rich Siegel) (05/14/91)
In article <1991May13.092550.21150@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU> kempkec@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (Christopher Kempke) writes: >In article <53400@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes: >>The accompanying >>text in the digest posting notes that the 3.02 updater makes >>Think Pascal "90%" 7.0 compatible, but says nothing about Think C. >>Pascal supposedly won't work with VM or 32-bit mode. The patch notest distributed with each patch describe only the changes to that product; for details about the THINK C patch, read the notes that come with the 4.0.5 updater. > Actually, if you unpack them, they both say the same thing, so > presumably they both make the same "mistake" to prevent VirMem > /32-bit clean operation. Both supposedly produce 32-bit clean Actually, they don't. :-) Either way, there will be versions of both products which are 100% compatible with virtual memory and 32-bit MMU modes. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Rich Siegel Internet: siegel@world.std.com Software Engineer Applelink: SIEGEL Symantec Languages Group
phils@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Phil Shapiro) (05/14/91)
In article <53400@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes: Just found the announcement for the Think Pascal 3.02 updater [ on sumex /info-mac/lang/think-pascal-302-updater.hqx, along with a similar updater for Think C 4.05 ]. The accompanying text in the digest posting notes that the 3.02 updater makes Think Pascal "90%" 7.0 compatible, but says nothing about Think C. Pascal supposedly won't work with VM or 32-bit mode. The question: which development system works better under 7.0? Will they both work eventually, or should people starting out go with Think C? Thanks, Bill (johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu) Think C works just as well as Think Pascal (or just as bad, depending on how you look at it). Neither support 32 bit mode, and neither work with System 7 VM. There will be new versions of both products that will run under 32 and 24 bit modes, with (and without) VM, and that will let developers write applications that use all of the new System 7 features. At this point, Symantec hasn't made any announcements as to how these versions will be distributed, and what (if any) the charge will be. -phil -- Phil Shapiro Technical Support Analyst Language Products Group Symantec Corporation Internet: phils@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu
jsk@elaine37.Stanford.EDU (Jeffrey Kuskin) (05/14/91)
I applied the 4.0.5 patch and started using the new debugger on some code I had been debugging with version 4.0.2. However, after only a few minutes and only about 75 "step" or "trace" commands, the debugger put up an alert saying it was critically low on memory. This never happened to me with the 4.0.2 debugger, and the code was the same. The code has no recursion or other mempry-eating features. In fact, the call chain is never more than 4 functions deep and I was displaying only about 10 variables. I have since reverted to the 4.0.2 debugger. Has anyone else encountered these symptoms? System: IIcx, 5mb, 6.0.4 -- Jeff Kuskin Stanford University jsk@leland.stanford.edu
Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) (05/16/91)
Jeffrey Kuskin writes in a message to All
JK> I have since reverted to the 4.0.2 debugger.
JK> Has anyone else encountered these symptoms? System: IIcx, 5mb,
JK> 6.0.4
ISn't Think C 4.04 and above for System 7.0?
Lawson
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!300!15.88!Lawson.English
Internet: Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.orggft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (opcode ranger) (05/17/91)
In article <PHILS.91May13143941@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu>, phils@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Phil Shapiro) writes: [...] > There will be new versions of both products that will run under 32 and > 24 bit modes, with (and without) VM, and that will let developers > write applications that use all of the new System 7 features. Speaking of THINK upgrades, I heard a rumour that THINK C 5.0 would be released in the near future. Now I know that posing the following questions is an exercise in the purest optimism, but: 1) Is there ever going to be a THINK C++? 2) What improvements can we expect to see in THINK C? Yes, I know that no one from Symantec will answer these questions. And that puzzles me somewhat. I mean, who is going to get a competitive advantage from this? What other non-MPW Mac compilers are there? Ah well, a shot in the dark... :-> Robert -- ============================================================================ = gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu * generic disclaimer: * "Good tea. = = * all my opinions are * Nice house." = = * mine * -Worf = ============================================================================