home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!apple!apple!applelink.apple.com
- From: ASTRO.SPUD@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Lockwood, Mike)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
- Subject: Re: SLM & Dinker
- Message-ID: <724377441.6708607@AppleLink.Apple.COM>
- Date: 14 Dec 92 23:53:00 GMT
- Sender: daemon@Apple.COM
- Organization: AppleLink Gateway
- Lines: 33
-
- Hi Thomas,
-
- There are a lot of differences between SLM and Dinker (forgive me if I can't
- think of all of them). Neither can be thought of as a superset of the other.
- However, as SLM evolves, this may someday be the case.
-
- Here are the differences I can think of:
-
- SLM is supported by Apple and will continue to grow and develop; Dinker is not
- supported.
-
- SLM allows you to share libraries of code between several applications; Dinker
- does not.
-
- Dinker allows you to develop an application that can dynamically load
- extensions, either at the start of the application or later on as a result of a
- use command. The extensions can be developed independently of the application,
- perhaps by a different person or organization. I don't believe SLM currently
- supports this.
-
- Dinker works with modified versions of MacApp 2.0 and 3.0; SLM is not
- compatible with MacApp, because SLM does not support PascalObject (maybe
- Bedrock will support SLM???)
-
- SLM includes support for memory and object allocation at interrupt time, and
- other goodies that make it useful for system level programming (it was designed
- to support networking protocols).
-
- I'm sure I missed somethings, and my details might be a bit sketchy. Check the
- documentation on E.T.O #9 for more information!
-
- Mike Lockwood
-
-