ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (05/13/88)
[ Urp! ] David Joiner (talin @ BIX) has some questions for Matt... Schwab -------- amiga/other #329, from talin, 1389 chars, Thu May 12 01:45:09 1988 This is a comment to message 321. -------------------------- More comments to Matt Dillon, if Leo would be so kind... 1. Can the 'generic structurre editing' be a seperate facility from the actual resource/set tools? That is to say, If I write an editor that knows what a Gadget structure looks like, and I don't care to look at any other structure types, I don't need all the structure descriptions. In fact, my suggestion is to have a new resource type 'SDEF' (stands for structure definition) which has a resource name equal to the type of structure it is defining. (I would also want a 'XDEF' which might contain an executable for initializing and handling said structures, for example you load in an 'XDEF/Window', send it a 'New' message, and it returns a fully-initialized window, even if your applicaiton doesn't know how to build one). The SDEFs and XDEFs could be stored in either the same file or a different one (For example, all the 'common' structs would have SDEFs in the System.Set file. Personally I'm not all that interested in editing structures generically, at least not at this point (That's what Patch Editor Construction Set does, and it's a major bitch). Since the CONTENT of any structure is, in my opinion, as important as the format, I really don't see it as being useful for anything but the simplest of structures, but I may be wrong. Specialized resource editors are more what I am interested in writing.
dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) (05/15/88)
:[ Urp! ] : : David Joiner (talin @ BIX) has some questions for Matt... : : Schwab :-------- :amiga/other #329, from talin, 1389 chars, Thu May 12 01:45:09 1988 :This is a comment to message 321. :-------------------------- : More comments to Matt Dillon, if Leo would be so kind... : : 1. Can the 'generic structurre editing' be a seperate facility from :the actual resource/set tools? That is to say, If I write an editor :that knows what a Gadget structure looks like, and I don't care to look :at any other structure types, I don't need all the structure descriptions. Right. But the resource system does need to know the structure descriptions to be able to decode the resource (i.e. resolve pointers to sub-structures and such). The structure description itself would be extremely compact. The fact that the structure description always exists means the resource editor can edit/view *anybodys* resource in fine detail. The resource editor would be object oriented in the sense that anybody can tell it 'hey, I know how to edit a resource of type <Blah>'. This also fits rather well into my developing scheme. I've been talking to several people... Most noteably, Jim Mackraz, who has suggested a more object-oriented approach. Not only do you have resource structures, but you have functions that are automatically applied to them. So, for instance, if you GetRes() a NewWindow structure a function would automatically be called to OpenWindow() it and a Window structure pointer would be returned instead! > Personally I'm not all that interested in editing structures >generically, at least not at this point (That's what Patch Editor >Construction Set does, and it's a major bitch). Since the CONTENT >of any structure is, in my opinion, as important as the format, I >really don't see it as being useful for anything but the simplest >of structures, but I may be wrong. Specialized resource editors are more >what I am interested in writing. I think it is a necessary part of my idea for a standard. Also the problem of naming structure types is pretty much solved ... use the same names as structures defined in the Amiga includes. Custom structures defined by software companies are private to their executables, and if they want to make them global (put them in a 'global' resource file), it is easy to find a unique name since names are not limited to 4 characters. There might be some concern over the amount of space this all takes up. It really isn't that much. An instance of a structure definition occurs exactly once. Any references to that structure by resources or other structure defs is solely with a two byte ID, and uninteresting entries can be skipped (e.g. if you have a lot of non-pointer fields they can be defined in a lump instead of by a lot of references to 'integer' structures or something like that). P.S. I've gone through several complete redesigns since my first posting! -Matt
doug-merritt@cup.portal.com (05/17/88)
"Patch editor construction set"??? What's that? Something that already
exists, an idea, in progress, or what?
Leo, interesting to see that you've become the worlds first Human
Network Gateway. :-) Perhaps this could be automated...
%AUTOTRANSFER TARGET:BIX
Test message from Usenet, 1, 2, 3...testing.
Anyone see this???
%ENDTRANSFER
:-) :-)
---
Doug Merritt ucbvax!sun.com!cup.portal.com!doug-merritt
or ucbvax!eris!doug (doug@eris.berkeley.edu)
or ucbvax!unisoft!certes!doug