Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!tagreen
From: tagreen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Todd A. Green)
Subject: Re: The NeXT is easier to program than the Mac(was: The Fate...
Message-ID: <1991Mar25.145420.16015@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
References: <1991Mar23.190432.5683@cc.helsinki.fi> <1991Mar23.225116.21450@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <mb7G6-.71@cs.psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 91 14:54:20 GMT
Lines: 63

In article <mb7G6-.71@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>
>In article <1991Mar23.225116.21450@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> tagreen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Todd A. Green) writes:
>
> [original post deleted]
>Bullshit.  Anyone else on the net want to claim that they went through
>all 5 (aren't we up to 7) volumes of inside the Mac in one day(or one
>month).  And I've used RedEdit 2.1 and it doesn't touch the NeXT
>Interface Builder.

Bullshit yourself.  I didn't say I memorized all 5 volumes( and no we
are not up to VII.  VI is supposedly released on a developer's CD which
I haven't had the chance to verify yet ), in a day, and that Apple is
going to hire me tomorrow to work on System 8.  I stated that I
easily compiled a program (actually two.  One to play with PRAM, and
another to fiddle with offscreen ports ), after I got the books, and a
few tutorials.

>You might as well get used to classes, inheritance, etc, even Apple is
>going to use OO programming as the paradigm for Mac programming.  Take
>C++ with MacApp, for example.  Actually, doesn't Object Pascal have
>classes, etc.  Strikes me that it should.  Self is the only classless
>OO language of which I know.  So, I guess Apple is already using an OO
>paradigm.  Anyway, Objective C has a much smaller learning curve than
>C++.  There are fewer extensions to C.

THINK C does have object class libraries (TCL). And yes Apple is going
to OO.  System 7 is written in C++ if I'm not mistaken. And yes I'm
getting used to OO programming but it takes more than a day ;).

> [more stuff deleted]
>The basics on the Mac are already done for you on the NeXT.  Even if
>it took you twice as long to learn on the NeXT, you will still be able
>to do more after you learn how to program the NeXT, and do it faster.

Once you do something on the Mac once you can obviously use the code
over and over.  So you really only have to do the "basics" once. Again
I don't want to get in a huge debate on Mac vs. NeXT.  It's just my
personal experience that there's less info aviable to novices wanting
to learn about the NeXT than on the Mac.  Though I've recently heard
of a tuturial put out by Purdue.  I'll have to check it out.

>I think the main problem with NeXT programming is that the 2.0 docs
>haven't been released yet.  Things should become a lot clearer to the
>neophyte NeXT programmer when this happens.

Neophyte...rather nice choice of words...painfully true ;).  But don't
forget that you were once neophyte; we all start somewhere.

>
>-Mike

Todd
==============================================================================
Todd A. Green   "<_CyberWolf_>"  ---> Pascal <- tagreen@ucs.indiana.edu
Unix Systems Administration      ---> Unix <--- tagreen@silver.ucs.indiana.edu 
Macintosh Systems Administration ---> VMS <---- tagreen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu
WCC Office:136.04 phone:855-0949 ---> C <------ tagreen@lothario.ucs.indiana 
"Friends don't let friends       ---> Mac <---- tagreen@iubacs.BITNET
 Use DOS" - Scott Ostrander      ---> SunOS <-- tagreen@lykos (FTP only)
==============================================================================


