kevinc@beau.adp.wisc.edu (Kevin Cherek) (02/28/91)
I just started doing Windows development. I have MSC 6.0 and the SDK. I have the option of purchasing Actor 3.0 from the Whitewater group for $99. Can anyone tell me how the two tools compare? You can email me or post. If you do post, please do so only to comp.windows.ms. (I only posted here because I wanted to reach the windows programmers.) I will summarize to comp.windows.ms. Thanks, kevin.cherek@mail.admin.wisc.edu
kwong@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Ka Chin Wong) (02/28/91)
By all means choose Actor. An excellent object oriented programming language. With Actor, you don't need SDK to build Windows application. You learn Actor and at the same time you learn OOP. In a way, Actor is very similar to Smalltalk (Programming Environment). Actually, it is like a combination of LISP, Smalltalk, C, and Pascal, but with a simple, power (and at the same time easy to read) syntax. The only drawback I can think of is a relative small Actor programming community. When you are stuck, you may have a hard time find local help. The Whitewater group does have a BBS and a forum on Compuserve though. However, the BBS is more benifical to those who live in Chicago area, and Compuserve costs. There isn't a newsgroup like comp.lang.actor there yet; however, if you have questions that I may know, feel free to drop me a mail. Rick
pcb@basin04.cacs.usl.edu (Peter C. Bahrs) (03/01/91)
In article <27cc5b87.6199@petunia.CalPoly.EDU> kwong@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Ka Chin Wong) writes: > > >By all means choose Actor. An excellent object oriented programming >language. With Actor, you don't need SDK to build Windows application. >You learn Actor and at the same time you learn OOP. > > I use actor as much as C/SDK and love it. I like the design principles and benefits of OO development. From a theoretical and instructional viewpoint get it, learn it, and use it. But I would not develop a commercial application in actor,yet (my opinion). If you are working on prototypes or university assignments, fine. There are still some irritating problems when the system encounters windows errors (what windows app does not crash anyway?). And little things like 'a method size is limited'. Also there is the whole mess about sealing off an application. You need 2 256K files, minimum, for every stand alone application. uggggh. However, I heard a new release is due out soon!
kls@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Kenneth L Shellberg) (03/01/91)
Found this on CompuServe, and felt that it deserved further dissemination:
Sb: #ACTOR 3.0 only $99.99!!!
Fm: Donald Ryan 71460,74
To: ALL WINDOWS USERS
ATTENTION ALL WINDOWS USERS! Through a special arrangement between the
Whitewater Group and GUI CLEARING HOUSE (1-800-522-4624) you can purchase the
complete ACTOR 3.0 object-oriended development system at the unprecedented and
one-time only price of $99.99, plus shipping & handling.
Actor 3.0 is a significantly enhanced version of the most popular
object-oriented development system for Windows 3.0 allowing you to
develope standalone executable Windows programs and distribute them
without paying royalties. Actor includes a complete class library for
windowing, graphics, data management and more, and is the fastest way to get
from prototype to completed application.
Take advantage of this incredible limited time offer and save
almost $800.00 off the suggested retail price of $895.00! Order ACTOR 3.0
from GUI CLEARING HOUSE before March 31, 1991 and pay only $99.99 plus
shipping & handling. ORDER TODAY! 1-800-522-4624
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- Ken Shellberg | Internet: kls@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu -
- The Ohio State University | CIS: 76247.1705@compuserve.com -
- Geology & Mineralogy | Voice: 614-292-2721 -yow@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (Billy Yow 283-4009) (03/01/91)
> Take advantage of this incredible limited time offer and save >almost $800.00 off the suggested retail price of $895.00! Order ACTOR 3.0 >from GUI CLEARING HOUSE before March 31, 1991 and pay only $99.99 plus >shipping & handling. ORDER TODAY! 1-800-522-4624 Has anybody ordered this? Who/What is the GUI clearing House? If you have ordered Actor is it the full 3.0 version? Can you upgrade and does the Whitewater Group support copies ordered from the GUI clearing House? Thanks Bill Yow yow@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov
adw@otter.hpl.hp.com (Dave Wells) (03/01/91)
From: kwong@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Ka Chin Wong) >By all means choose Actor. An excellent object oriented programming >language. With Actor, you don't need SDK to build Windows application. >You learn Actor and at the same time you learn OOP. Be warned - although you don't *need* the SDK to program with ACTOR (3.0), it is very advisable to own and be familiar with the SDK documentation. In principle, you could use the most basic Windows facilites (menus, dialog boxes, etc., from ACTOR without knowing SDK. The ACTOR equivalents are, however, sparsely documented or not documented at all. (For example, Window:changeMenu()). You need to look up the calls that such ACTOR methods make to Windows to be able to use them. Many of the SDK facilities (bitmaps, etc.) are not supported by ACTOR at all. (It's easy enough to call the relevant Windows functions from ACTOR, but not without the SDK manuals!) >In a way, Actor is very similar to Smalltalk (Programming Environment). >Actually, it is like a combination of LISP, Smalltalk, C, and Pascal, >but with a simple, power (and at the same time easy to read) syntax. Yes, ACTOR seems to be SmallTalk 72 (language and environment) with the language syntax shuffled a bit. As such, it inherits many of the problems of SmallTalk which SmallTalk 80 was designed to overcome. In addition, it lacks the SmallTalk MVC paradigm (*) for designing the user interface, and doesn't put anything in its place. To me, this is an extremely serious omission, and leads inevitably to messy, unstructured applications. Moreover, the documentation on the ACTOR kernel calls is thin or nonexistent (compared to the SDK reference manual, say). If you're the sort of person who's happy to find out what an ACTOR call does by reading the code, trying it out, and then concluding "this seems to work, so it must be OK", you'll find this quite acceptable. As you can probably tell, it makes me annoyed and frustrated, especially as the SDK itself demonstrates a much higher standard of documentation. Dave Wells Disclaimer: these are my views, not those of Hewlett Packard. (*) Model-Pane-Dispatcher is the SmallTalk V equivalent.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/02/91)
In article <72170001@otter.hpl.hp.com> adw@otter.hpl.hp.com (Dave Wells) writes:
Yes, ACTOR seems to be SmallTalk 72 (language and environment) with the
language syntax shuffled a bit. As such, it inherits many of the problems
of SmallTalk which SmallTalk 80 was designed to overcome. In addition, it
lacks the SmallTalk MVC paradigm (*) for designing the user interface, and
doesn't put anything in its place. To me, this is an extremely serious
omission, and leads inevitably to messy, unstructured applications.
What kind of experiences have people had with Smalltalk, Digitalk or
PP, on a 386 machine with Windows? Can "real" applications be written
with Smalltalk?
-Mikeal@well.sf.ca.us (Alfred Fontes) (03/07/91)
kls@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Kenneth L Shellberg) writes: >Sb: #ACTOR 3.0 only $99.99!!! What if this is completely legit, and you just paid $600 for the same thing?