pete@titan.rice.edu (Pete Keleher) (07/14/89)
After all of the hoopla months ago, I've heard not a thing about SADE. Is it even out? Do people use it? Does it REQUIRE 4 MEG like the rumor has it? What about Jasic's source-level debugging, is it reasonably slick (say, compared to THINK's source-level debugger) or is a hack like the old MacNosy was. I'd like to start using MPW because I want the tools (Mac tools and ported UNIX tools) and I want to use my own editor. I also want to make sure that I have a useful and reasonably fast platform when I get everything assembled. Comments? -- =========================================================================== Pete Keleher pete@titan.rice.edu Rice University knows nuttin about what I say, or what I do ... ===========================================================================
keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) (07/14/89)
In article <PETE.89Jul13210233@titan.rice.edu> pete@titan.rice.edu (Pete Keleher) writes: > >I'd like to start using MPW because I want the tools (Mac tools and >ported UNIX tools) and I want to use my own editor. I also want to make >sure that I have a useful and reasonably fast platform when I get >everything assembled. > >Comments? > Yeah, don't use MPW for the things you list above. MPW is not what you would consider reasonably fast (unless you are comparing against an Apple II). Neither can you simply swap in your own editor. Many of the functions necessary for using MPW are integrated into the editor. Or rather, the editor is inte- grated into the shell. Whatever. What MPW does offer you is power. It also gives some of the best code generation available on the Mac (once you overlook the code generation bugs in the C compiler). Finally, it gives you the ability to expand with either your own tools, or ones that you've aquired elsewhere. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keith Rollin --- Apple Computer, Inc. --- Developer Technical Support INTERNET: keith@apple.com UUCP: {decwrl, hoptoad, nsc, sun, amdahl}!apple!keith "Argue for your Apple, and sure enough, it's yours" - Keith Rollin, Contusions
earleh@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Earle R. Horton) (07/15/89)
In article <33136@apple.Apple.COM> keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) writes: >Yeah, don't use MPW for the things you list above. MPW is not what you >would consider reasonably fast (unless you are comparing against an >Apple II). Neither can you simply swap in your own editor. Many of >the functions necessary for using MPW are integrated into the editor. >Or rather, the editor is integrated into the shell. Whatever. There is probably no reason you cannot use any editor as your primary source code editor while developing programs under the MPW Shell. I find it fairly simple to swap in my own editor; there are a number of techniques for doing this. I would suggest clicking the mouse in one of its windows as the best technique. You do need 2 Meg and to use MultiFinder, however. I have used Microemacs consistently with MPW Shell for a year now. I find it much more suitable for writing C code than the Shell's built in editor. >What MPW does offer you is power. It also gives some of the best code >generation available on the Mac (once you overlook the code generation >bugs in the C compiler). Finally, it gives you the ability to expand >with either your own tools, or ones that you've aquired elsewhere. Don't forget that you can use third party compilers with MPW! If you don't like the code generation bugs in the MPW C compiler, then you can put up with those in the Aztec C compiler! If you don't like the code generation bugs in the MPW Pascal compiler, then try the TML Pascal compiler! Earle R. Horton "People forget how fast you did a job, but they remember how well you did it." Salada Tag Lines
rampil@cca.ucsf.edu (Ira Rampil) (07/24/89)
In article <PETE.89Jul13210233@titan.rice.edu> pete@titan.rice.edu (Pete Keleher) writes: > >After all of the hoopla months ago, I've heard not a thing about SADE. >Is it even out? Do people use it? Does it REQUIRE 4 MEG like the rumor >has it? > >What about Jasic's source-level debugging, is it reasonably slick >(say, compared to THINK's source-level debugger) or is a hack like the >old MacNosy was. > >I'd like to start using MPW because I want the tools (Mac tools and >ported UNIX tools) and I want to use my own editor. I also want to make >sure that I have a useful and reasonably fast platform when I get >everything assembled. > >Comments? Yes SADE is out and it doesn't need 4 meg but IMHO it is slow and a hack to use. For my 2 cents(actually, quite a bit more), I use Jasik's Debugger. It really is nothing like the original version of Nosy, no longer line driven, but fully mouse and window interfaced and does just about everything I want from a debugger. It now provides assembler, source or mixed levels of debug. The new news from Jasik Designs is the 'Incremental Build System' which gives MPW C and Pascal a Lightspeed-like smart linker and a huge decrease in Compile-Link-Test-Edit cycle time. Good Luck, Ira Rampil Department of Anesthesia UCSF disclaimer: Jasik is an acquantance of mine, and I am a satisfied customer of his.
Howard.Ashcraft@f444.n161.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Howard Ashcraft) (03/27/91)
I am a C programmer (Think 4.0) who is beginning to write assembly language
routines to optimize C programs. Does anyone have an opinion on the
advantages
and disadvantages of TMON, Jasik Debugger and Macsbug? Is it worth the extra
money to buy the Jasik debugger with MacNosy? Also, which version of Macsbug
runs correctly on an SE/30. I have a beta version 6.1b1 which crashes my
SE/30
and does not appear to respond to all debugger commands on a Mac+.
--
Howard Ashcraft - via FidoNet node 1:125/777
UUCP: ...!uunet!hoptoad!fidogate!161!444!Howard.Ashcraft
INTERNET: Howard.Ashcraft@f444.n161.z1.FIDONET.ORGjtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) (05/13/91)
I'm looking for a sophsitcated debugger (preferably source code debugger) and am currently considering two candidates: Jasik's debugger and Mac Nosy (I assume these are two seperate things) and TMON Pro. From what I can gather the Jasik debugger is really good and does source code debugging while TMON is very good at a low level but does not do source code debugging. Also the Jasik debugger is NOT cheap. $300! So tell me folks, are there any other debuggers I should be looking into and are there any features of the above that make one hands-down better than the other (the sourcecode issue)?
sjhg9320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Maximum Slackness ) (05/13/91)
Jasik's product does most everything TMON Pro does, and more. It's probably the best Software-Based monitor you can buy, not considering cost. If cost is a consideration, MacsBug probably offers the most bang for the buck. -- ______________________________________________________________________________ ==============================================================================
jeremyr@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Jeremy Roussak) (05/14/91)
In <1991May13.153014.22562@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> sjhg9320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Maximum Slackness ) writes: >Jasik's product does most everything TMON Pro does, and more. >It's probably the best Software-Based monitor you can buy, not >considering cost. I see from last month's BYTE that there's a new version of Jasik's debugger. How does this compare with TMON Pro, etc? Jeremy Roussak
Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) (05/15/91)
Maximum Slackness writes in a message to All
MS> If cost is a consideration, MacsBug probably offers the most
MS> bang for the buck.
As MacsBug needn't cost anything, I would say you would be correct no matter
how little it accomplished (or was that your point?).
Lawson
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!300!15.88!Lawson.English
Internet: Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.orgJim.Spencer@p510.f22.n282.z1.fidonet.org (Jim Spencer) (05/17/91)
Maximum Slackness writes in a message to All MS> Jasik's product does most everything TMON Pro does, and more. MS> It's probably the best Software-Based monitor you can buy, not MS> considering cost. MS> If cost is a consideration, MacsBug probably offers the most MS> bang for the buck. While not disagreeing with the above, it needs to be recognized that TMON Pro will do an awful lot of what The Debugger does with considerably greater ease of installation and use not to mention better manuals. The point is all three have their place. * Origin: White Mailer Test Point (1.0d6) (1:282/22.510)