gmarzot@mbunix.mitre.org (G. Marzot) (02/05/91)
I would be interested in hearing comments on SuperCard vs. ThinkP/C-TCL. I am not a programmer by training but have done my share of Mac programming , primarily with Think Pascal and now recently including the TCL. In the course of a recent project(a very large application involving rich GUI, motion graphics, simple calculations and database access/implemented by a design team of 4 or 5 people)some colleagues have suggested that Supercard is more suited to the task. What are the trade offs between the two? Responsiveness may be an issue but Object-Pascal with the TCL does not give PEAK speed performance anyway. Flexability may be an issue also but so far we have not seen anything that SC cannot do that TP can(comments?). Another point that was recognized was that in SC the structure of the program was limited to the objects they provide(i.e., cards, fields. buttons) and that one could not ,say,design an abstract supervisory object to talk to a number of other objects. anyway my feeling is that they both must have their own application-space, the trouble is in drawing the line. Thanks for any input. -GSM PS - lets not turn this into a flame fest. Responsibility for the views expressed here belongs only to myself and not to any organization.
Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) (02/06/91)
G. Marzot writes in a message to All
GM> I would be interested in hearing comments on SuperCard vs. ThinkP/C-TCL
My sole question: How large is the stand-alone code for the SuperCard application
vs the TCL one? If they are comparable, then go with the easiest to implement/maintain.
If SuperCard is larger (it would be hard to imagine the TCL app being larger),
then decide just how large is too large.
If you can implement (and expand) your project in either, this seems to be the
only really pertinent question (that and speed).
Lawson
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!300!15.88!Lawson.English
Internet: Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.orgmacgyver@skink.cis.ohio-state.edu (wilson m liaw) (02/07/91)
In article <1647.27B01608@stjhmc.fidonet.org> Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) writes: >G. Marzot writes in a message to All >My sole question: How large is the stand-alone code for the SuperCard application >vs the TCL one? If they are comparable, then go with the easiest to implement/maintain. >If SuperCard is larger (it would be hard to imagine the TCL app being larger), >then decide just how large is too large. > I believe Supercard adds in around 600k worth of code in stand alone application, TCL is around 100k I think... Mac -- Wilson MacGyver | In every heart, there is a time machine Internet:macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu | if you believe in your memeory. Trace =====================================| every place you've been, you know what Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only| it means. -Encouragement from Martika
wayner@kama.cs.cornell.edu (Peter Wayner) (02/08/91)
macgyver@skink.cis.ohio-state.edu (wilson m liaw) writes: >In article <1647.27B01608@stjhmc.fidonet.org> Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) writes: >>G. Marzot writes in a message to All >>My sole question: How large is the stand-alone code for the SuperCard application >>vs the TCL one? If they are comparable, then go with the easiest to implement/maintain. > I believe Supercard adds in around 600k worth of code in stand alone >application, TCL is around 100k I think... I just built an app with Think Pascal's Class Language. This sizes are: Back-end data processing stuff (tested before the front end): 28k Whole thing with user-interface build with TCL: 104k > Mac >-- >Wilson MacGyver | In every heart, there is a time machine >Internet:macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu | if you believe in your memeory. Trace >=====================================| every place you've been, you know what >Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only| it means. -Encouragement from Martika Peter Wayner Department of Computer Science Cornell Univ. Ithaca, NY 14850 EMail:wayner@cs.cornell.edu Office: 607-255-9202 or 255-1008 Home: 116 Oak Ave, Ithaca, NY 14850 Phone: 607-277-6678
oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) (02/09/91)
Does Supercard allow you to define recursive data structures? For example,
this is the C for a binary tree whose left and right children are also
binary trees:
typedef struct BinTree {
struct BinTree *left, *right;
Ptr contents;
}BinTree ;
Remember that THINK C, C++ or object Pascal give you access to modern
software development technology. You get class inheritance and data
abstraction. By comparison, Hypercard has almost no facilities for
abstract data types.
In hypercard, globally visible procedure must be in the script of the home
card of the stack. This is a single "file" limited to at most 32k. I
am guessing that SuperCard has the same limit.
In C, C++ or Pascal, you can spread the globally visible procedures
across many files, and have much more than 32k bytes of them. Multiple,
small files, each with some consistency of topic are easier to maintain
than one giant home card script.
I am happier writing the kinds of programs I write in C or Pascal than in
Hypercard.
--
-- David Phillip Oster - At least the government doesn't make death worse.
-- oster@well.sf.ca.us = {backbone}!well!osterLawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org (Lawson English) (02/11/91)
David Phillip Oster writes in a message to All
DPO> In hypercard, globally visible procedure must be in the script
DPO> of the home card of the stack. This is a single "file" limited
DPO> to at most 32k. I am guessing that SuperCard has the same limit.
I believe that HC 2.0 allows more than one script to exist in the message hierarchy.
For me, the big question (as 600K for a stand-alone SuperCard app is at least
6 times greater then the overhead of using the TCL's in Think C/Pascal) is whether
the program in question can be written, maintained and expanded using SuperCard.
Unless SuperCard is so much easier in those areas that 600K vs 100K doesn't
matter, go with Think.
Lawson
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!300!15.88!Lawson.English
Internet: Lawson.English@p88.f15.n300.z1.fidonet.org