davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) (07/10/90)
In reference to Wolfgang Strobl's request for a Mac programming book like Petzold's Programming Windows: First, there really isn't one. Petzold's book really stands alone in the Windows world and it's a shame that the Mac doesn't have as good an intro. But there are good ones nevertheless. Macintosh Programming Primer Dave Mark & Cartwright Reed Addison-Wesley 89 (Geared to work with Think C; this one is very good though it is more of a primer than Petzold's is; i.e. Petzold goes a bit farther) A pair of books by Scott Knaster: How to Write Macintosh Software & Macintosh Programming Secrets (both Addison-Wesley I think; I only have the latter one with me; examples are in Pascal) If you don't mind Pascal examples, the following two volume set is good: Macintosh Revealed, 2nd edition Stephen Chernicoff Hayden Press (I think) And concerning Wolfgang's comment about DAs and Multifinder being a kludge: It seems to me that he was saying that Windows from the outset was a multi-tasking multi-running-program environment; i.e. "Multifinder" was there from the outset in Windows. The concept of the DA was a means of allowing for a concurrently running application before the advent of the Multifinder. Under the Multifinder, DAs are just treated as a kind of special application, and the closer we get to System 7, the less useful the DA concept becomes. They are just other apps in effect. Arthur Davis
strobl@gmdzi.UUCP (Wolfgang Strobl) (07/14/90)
davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) writes: >In reference to Wolfgang Strobl's request for a Mac programming book >like Petzold's Programming Windows: (references deleted) >If you don't mind Pascal examples, the following two volume set is good: I *do* mind, but will try to get a look into all books you mentioned, anyway, in their order. Thanks. >And concerning Wolfgang's comment about DAs and Multifinder being a kludge: >It seems to me that he was saying that Windows from the outset was a >multi-tasking multi-running-program environment; i.e. "Multifinder" was >there from the outset in Windows. The concept of the DA was a means of >allowing for a concurrently running application before the advent of the >Multifinder. Under the Multifinder, DAs are just treated as a kind of >special application, and the closer we get to System 7, the less useful >the DA concept becomes. They are just other apps in effect. My comment about the Multifinder beeing a kludge may have been a bit too strong - it was a reaction to the statement of Windows beeing "a kludge built on top of DOS". DA's surely are. I am not so sure about the Multifinder. The two books I have read so far (two a week :-) "Programmer's Introduction to the Macintosh Family" and "Technical Intro. ..." tell nothing about the Multifinder. The problem with the Multifinder is not so much one of the Multifinder itself, but of the applications running under it. Most of them are written under the assumption that they have the whole screen area at their disposal - no need to make windows resizeable, zoomable, or to be able to hide some portions of the application - all things which are standard in the Windows world. This is why many Mac people are so proud about their Macs ability to drive more than monitor and to create one big desktop on them. They need it. Wolfgang Strobl #include <std.disclaimer.h>
minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) (07/17/90)
From article <3097@gmdzi.UUCP>, by strobl@gmdzi.UUCP (Wolfgang Strobl): > davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) writes: >>In reference to Wolfgang Strobl's request for a Mac programming book >>like Petzold's Programming Windows: > > (references deleted) > >>If you don't mind Pascal examples, the following two volume set is good: > > I *do* mind, but will try to get a look into all books you mentioned, > anyway, in their order. Thanks. There is also a book on Mac programming that uses C, 'Programming the Mac With THINK C" or something like that. Also, the inro to mac by Apple is ok for a very _over_ overview, but I found much was missing. One thing I never accuse Apple of is giving us too much documentation. (Inside Mac Volume 5 was "new" with the Mac II, and who knows when IM 6 will be published... right after the software supercedes it no doubt.) >>And concerning Wolfgang's comment about DAs and Multifinder being a kludge: >>It seems to me that he was saying that Windows from the outset was a >>multi-tasking multi-running-program environment; i.e. "Multifinder" was >>there from the outset in Windows. The concept of the DA was a means of >>allowing for a concurrently running application before the advent of the >>Multifinder. Under the Multifinder, DAs are just treated as a kind of >>special application, and the closer we get to System 7, the less useful >>the DA concept becomes. They are just other apps in effect. > > My comment about the Multifinder beeing a kludge may have been a bit > too strong - it was a reaction to the statement of Windows beeing > "a kludge built on top of DOS". DA's surely are. I am not so > sure about the Multifinder. The two books I have read so far (two a week :-) > "Programmer's Introduction to the Macintosh Family" and "Technical > Intro. ..." tell nothing about the Multifinder. Technically, MF is quite an impressive kludge. It gets to do all sorts of nasty things behind everyone's back. DA's weren't meant to be real apps and so they have little help from the system. Writing DA's can be a royal pain and their usefulness is slipping away. If a kludge is bad, then MF is not a kludge. If a kludge is something internally messy but otherwise OK, MF is a kludge. (Kind of like "what is a hacker" IMHO.) > The problem with the Multifinder is not so much one of the Multifinder > itself, but of the applications running under it. Most of them are > written under the assumption that they have the whole screen area at > their disposal - no need to make windows resizeable, zoomable, or to be > able to hide some portions of the application - all things which are > standard in the Windows world. This is why many Mac people are so proud > about their Macs ability to drive more than monitor and to > create one big desktop on them. They need it. > > Wolfgang Strobl > #include <std.disclaimer.h> A couple points: 1) The current app's windows are always frontmost. (This is probably here for the long run, although it bugs me at times.) Therefore, whether a program hogs video real estate is not real important. Sys 7 will have a feature that allows you to hide the windows a a/all bkgd apps. 2) If Windows is a GUI that gains nothing by having more screen real estate, I'm shocked. It's the first. I can't afford the big guys, but I love to sit down at a mac with a gargantuan two page color display and a couple other monitors of varying size and bit-depth next to it with the ability to have full scale pages in front of me. I hate having to scroll. With a big screen, it get draws once unless something changes. Also, my Mac has a modest 9" B&W that I regularly run a bunch of programs simultaneously with. I still want something with more elbow room. (And my SE/30 has full color capabilities to do it...just not the get-one-for-a-dollar coupon. :-) ?: How does Windows handle varying pxiel desnities and aspect ratios? The Mac has a standard of 72dpi and monitors either keep it or loose a 1:1 correspondance betwen on screen and printed sizes. having a nice day (at 2:00am sigh), -- | _ /| | Robert Minich |Q: Why is the food so lousy, and | \'o.O' | Oklahoma State University |the service so bad? Time traveler: | =(___)= | minich@d.cs.okstate.edu |A:The waiters know in advance what | U | - Bill sez "Ackphtth" |kind of tip they'll be getting.