Developer CD Series 1993…ch: Other People's Memory/ADC Developer CD (1993-03) (''Other People's Memory'')_iso/Dev.CD Mar 93.iso/Development Platforms/CSMP Digests/csmp-v1-045.txt

Text File | 1992-11-18 | 43.4 KB | 1,111 lines | [TEXT/MPS ]

C.S.M.P. Digest             Thu, 09 Apr 92       Volume 1 : Issue 45

Today's Topics:

    Converting TeX fonts into Macintosh MS-WORD fonts
    Ligatures in practice
    Think C bug?
    How to tell idle time?
    How to use MacsBug
    Advice Needed :     SoftPC


The Comp.Sys.Mac.Programmer Digest is moderated by Michael A. Kelly.

These digests are available (by using FTP, account anonymous, your email
address as password) in the pub/mac/csmp-digest directory on ftp.cs.uoregon.
edu.  This is also the home of the comp.sys.mac.programmer Frequently Asked
Questions list.

These digests are also available via email.  Just send a note saying that you
want to be on the digest mailing list to [e-mail], and you will
automatically receive each new digest as it is created.

The articles in these digests are taken directly from comp.sys.mac.programmer.
They are not edited; all articles included in this digest are in their original
posted form.  The only articles that are -not- included in these digests are
those which didn't receive any replies (except those that give information
rather than ask a question).  All replies to each article are concatenated
onto the original article in the order in which they were received.  Article
threads are not added to the digests until the last article added to the
thread is at least one month old (this is to ensure that the thread is dead
before adding it to the digests).

Send administrative mail to [e-mail].

-------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Seth H. Rosenzweig)
Subject: Converting TeX fonts into Macintosh MS-WORD fonts
Date: 6 Mar 92 19:25:32 GMT
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science

I have a METAFONT-generated TeX font which I wish to convert into an
MS-WORD (or MacWrite) compatible Macintosh font.

More specifically, I have the METAFONT source code (.mf files), as
well as the resulting .gf (generic font files), .pk (packed bitmap
files), and .tfm (font metric files).

How would I convert these files into a set of MS-WORD compatible
Macintosh font files?
__________________
Seth H. Rosenzweig            [e-mail]
P.O. Box 1910, Brown University        [e-mail]
Providence, RI 02912            uunet!brunix!shr

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Jurgen Botz)
Date: 7 Mar 92 21:10:31 GMT
Organization: Mount Holyoke College

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Seth H. Rosenzweig) writes:
>I have a METAFONT-generated TeX font which I wish to convert into an
>MS-WORD (or MacWrite) compatible Macintosh font.
>
>More specifically, I have the METAFONT source code (.mf files), as
>well as the resulting .gf (generic font files), .pk (packed bitmap
>files), and .tfm (font metric files).
>
>How would I convert these files into a set of MS-WORD compatible
>Macintosh font files?

It's much more trouble than it's worth.  Theoretically you could
create the bitmaps (.gf files) at the size/resolution you want and
then write a program which will convert them Macintosh font bitmaps,
but I'd suspect it would take an _experienced_ Mac programmer several
days of full-time hacking to get it right.

An alternative approach would be print out the entire character set,
scan it into a Mac bitmap with a scanner, import that into a program
like Altsys Fontographer, trace the bitmaps, and create a full-blown
Postscript or TrueType font.  This is what you really want, since you
can then laser-print the bugger at any size and resolution and
generate bitmaps at any size for display, but it's even more work.
I've actually been toying with the idea of doing this for some of the
Computer Modern fonts just for fun, and have experimented with
Fontographer to that end, so I know what I'm talking about.

My advice is: stick with TeX.  MS-Word is a losing program anyway.
- --
Jurgen Botz                  |   Internet: [e-mail]
Academic Systems Consultant  |     Bitnet: [e-mail]
Mount Holyoke College        |      Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
South Hadley, MA, USA        | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Norris Preyer)
Organization: University of Oregon
Date:  7 Mar 1992 14:01 PST

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jurgen Botz) writes...
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Seth H. Rosenzweig) writes:
>>I have a METAFONT-generated TeX font which I wish to convert into an
>>MS-WORD (or MacWrite) compatible Macintosh font.
>>
>>More specifically, I have the METAFONT source code (.mf files), as
>>well as the resulting .gf (generic font files), .pk (packed bitmap
>>files), and .tfm (font metric files).
>>
>>How would I convert these files into a set of MS-WORD compatible
>>Macintosh font files?
>
>It's much more trouble than it's worth.  Theoretically you could
>create the bitmaps (.gf files) at the size/resolution you want and
>then write a program which will convert them Macintosh font bitmaps,
>but I'd suspect it would take an _experienced_ Mac programmer several
>days of full-time hacking to get it right.
>
>An alternative approach would be print out the entire character set,
>scan it into a Mac bitmap with a scanner, import that into a program
>like Altsys Fontographer, trace the bitmaps, and create a full-blown
>Postscript or TrueType font.  This is what you really want, since you
>can then laser-print the bugger at any size and resolution and
>generate bitmaps at any size for display, but it's even more work.
>I've actually been toying with the idea of doing this for some of the
>Computer Modern fonts just for fun, and have experimented with
>Fontographer to that end, so I know what I'm talking about.
>
>My advice is: stick with TeX.  MS-Word is a losing program anyway.
>--
>Jurgen Botz                  |   Internet: [e-mail]
>Academic Systems Consultant  |     Bitnet: [e-mail]
>Mount Holyoke College        |      Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
>South Hadley, MA, USA        | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629


I certainly agree with the last line!  If you do want to do this,
and have mpw, call the folks at Blue Sky Research (the folks
who write Textures).  They use suitcases to hold cm fonts for
Textures, and have a suite of mpw tools to convert pk and .tfm
files into suitcases.  I can't say what their distribution policy
for non-customers is, however, but they're very helpful to people
who've coughed up the $$ for Textures.
(I don't have the phone number for Blue Sky handy, send me e-mail
if directory assistance for Portland, OR can't help)

Norris Preyer


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Jesse Lee)
Date: 8 Mar 92 08:01:04 GMT
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

I remember seeing a program available at midway.uchicago.edu that can
convert a pk file into a Macintosh font resource.

Jesse Lee

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Chris Lewis)
Date: 8 Mar 92 15:44:54 GMT
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc., Ottawa, Canada

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jurgen Botz) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Seth H. Rosenzweig) writes:
|>I have a METAFONT-generated TeX font which I wish to convert into an
|>MS-WORD (or MacWrite) compatible Macintosh font.

|>More specifically, I have the METAFONT source code (.mf files), as
|>well as the resulting .gf (generic font files), .pk (packed bitmap
|>files), and .tfm (font metric files).

|>How would I convert these files into a set of MS-WORD compatible
|>Macintosh font files?

|It's much more trouble than it's worth.  Theoretically you could
|create the bitmaps (.gf files) at the size/resolution you want and
|then write a program which will convert them Macintosh font bitmaps,
|but I'd suspect it would take an _experienced_ Mac programmer several
|days of full-time hacking to get it right.

It's worth while mentioning some other possibilities.  Psroff 3.0
has a mechanism for converting PK and SFP format fonts into SFP and
PostScript.  It would probably not be too hard to convert pk2sfp's
output to generate Macintosh resource files.  Which means you could
convert HP SFP's and PK's into resource files.  I don't remember much
about the resource format.  Or, perhaps, you could use the Postscript
version instead.

If you do try this, let me know how far you get.

Lroff/lcat (psroff's remote ancestor) did have a mechanism for converting
Mac font resources into rasters, but I don't remember whether I included it
or not in the distribution, and I no longer have a copy of it.
- --
Chris Lewis; [e-mail]; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: [e-mail]
Ferret list: [e-mail]

---------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ben Haller)
Subject: Ligatures in practice
Date: 6 Mar 92 12:04:46 GMT
Organization: Stick Software


  Well, the thread on the history of ligatures on comp.lang.postscript
has inspired me to ask some questions I've been wondering about for a while.
I'm cross-posting to comp.sys.mac.programmer since I ask some questions
that are pretty far removed from PostScript specifically, but I think
there's enough PostScript-related stuff here to justify keeping it
here too.  Anyway, enough drivel:
  1. How can you tell, in PostScript or in a Mac program (preferably both)
whether a ligature is available for a given series of characters?  Is there
a place this information is stored?
  2. If, as one poster said, it is not *always* correct to replace the
sequence of letters with the ligature (shelfful being the example given),
then is there any way for a program to make ligature usage easy for the
user?  Automatic replacement would be easy enough, but having information
in a dictionary or something to tell you which letters should be ligatured
in any given word seems *very* cumbersome.  Or perhaps the exceptions to
the "always replace" rule are so few and far between as to make no never
mind?
  3. Assuming this issue is resolved, so your program "knows" how to
convert a word into its correct ligatured form.  How should this work
in terms of user interface?  The width of the word when ligatured will
probably be different from the non-ligatured width, so in order to get
word wrapping and justification and all correct on-screen, you need to
convert the word to its ligatured form as soon as it has been entered.
But then when the user goes back to that "fi" ligature and tries to select
the "f" and delete it, what do you do?  Do you split the ligature back
into its componant parts temporarily (and if so, do you reflow and
redisplay the text, since otherwise the broken pair won't necessarily
fit where the ligature was)?  Or do you just let the user figure out that
they can't select the "f", that they need to select the whole thing and
then re-type the "i"?
  Or perhaps it is wrong to convert to ligatures at all until print time,
and in the printing code you substitute the ligatures temporarily, and
you do not allow those changes to change the word wrapping.  But then
you're not WYSIWYG, and especially if the user is working on big headline
type the changes to the appearance of the text between the on-screen and
the printed versions would be unacceptable in some cases.
  Or perhaps you don't automate ligatures at all, let the novice users
get crappy looking output, and make the expert users go through and
make the ligatures by hand, and that way at least the program won't do
anything unexpected behind the user's back?
  Or perhaps you convert ligatures *on demand*, when the user selects a
menu item, and then whatever resolution you find for the editing issues,
at least you can blame the user if they get confused :->
  What do people think?  This seems very complex, but it would be really
nice for a novice user to not even need to know what a ligature *is*, but
have their output have them.  And conversely you want an expert to be
able to use ligatures or not as they see fit, not be pissed off by the
interface in any case, and not have to do a lot of busywork that the
computer *should* be able to do for them.  Is there a neat solution out
there?

- -Ben Haller ([e-mail])
"She said to take life slowly, as the leaves that grow on the tree...
 But I, being young and foolish, with this did not agree."
    - "Down By The Sally Gardens", Trad.

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Organization: Kalamazoo College
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1992 14:45:46 GMT

[e-mail] (Ben Haller) writes:
>
>  Well, the thread on the history of ligatures on comp.lang.postscript
>has inspired me to ask some questions I've been wondering about for a while.
>
>  3. Assuming this issue is resolved, so your program "knows" how to
>convert a word into its correct ligatured form.  How should this work
>in terms of user interface?  The width of the word when ligatured will
>probably be different from the non-ligatured width, so in order to get
>word wrapping and justification and all correct on-screen, you need to
>convert the word to its ligatured form as soon as it has been entered.
> [25 lines of interesting analysis of the possibilities deleted]
>Is there a neat solution out there?

This suddenly occurred to me:

How about the program recognizing ligatures as they appear, and keeping
the two letters distinct, but kerning them so they're the same width as
their ligature?  The user could still click between them, treat them
separately, and so forth;  if any changes were made that made
ligaturization impossible (such as italicizing one letter or inserting a
char between them), it would be cancelled and the original spacing
restored.  When printed, the ligature would be substituted.  It's not
complete WYSIWYG, but it's damn close.

It would probably be annoyingly noticeable in cases of fancy ligatures;
I don't know the technical term, but I've seen "ct" and "st" pairs that
add an ornamental line that would be missing on-screen.  And the German
"ch" pair can be very skinny;  that might look funny on-screen.

Now...what about three-letter ligatures like "ffi", "ffl", and "sch"?
Talk about a can of worms...
- --
 Jamie McCarthy     Internet: [e-mail]     AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 Kzoo randomly kills all my mail;  if I don't acknowledge, try resending.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Thomas A. Russ)
Date: 6 Mar 92 18:06:25 GMT
Organization: USC-ISI



In article ... [e-mail] (Ben Haller) writes:

  [about ligatures and programming difficulties]


To add to Ben's list, there is the problem of the interface to
spelling checking programs.  I don't know of any spelling checkers
that unwind ligatures.  I imagine this is related to the issue of
finding out about the existance of the ligatures.  Unless they are a
standard part of a font, it will be difficult to deal with this
problem.

The only good automated solution that I know of is the TeX/LaTeX
series of typesetting programs.  They are not WYSIWYG(*), so they don't
have any trouble substituting ligatures for letter combinations when
the output is produced, while at the same time making the editting
easy.  It also doesn't confuse spelling checkers (except for command
names, but that is a different issue).


- - Tom Russ

  (*) Also known in TeX circles as WYSIAYG  (What You See Is All You Get :)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Date: 8 Mar 92 03:28:09 GMT
Organization: Roslyn's Cafe

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>To add to Ben's list, there is the problem of the interface to
>spelling checking programs.  I don't know of any spelling checkers
>that unwind ligatures.  I imagine this is related to the issue of
>finding out about the existance of the ligatures.  Unless they are a
>standard part of a font, it will be difficult to deal with this
>problem.

Quark XPress 3.1 finally fully supports the standard fl/fi ligatures
(I've been begging them for 2 years!). Since I haven't yet installed
3.1, I can only go by Kathleen Tinkel's review in the latest MacWeek.
I'll summarize:

o will automatically replace fi/fl with ligature
o will automatically restore the single chars if kerning/tracking
widens letter spacing
o allows words with ligatures to hyphenate and spell check properly

Now if I could only get them to allow a variable word space for ragged
copy (just like they do for justified copy)....

Jeff

- --
Jeff's Oasis at Home.                   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                    [e-mail]
A man walks into a crowded theater and shouts, "ANYBODY WANT TO BUY A CAR?"
The crowd stands up and shouts back, "WRONG THEATER!" -Edward Vielmetti

---------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter Creath)
Subject: Think C bug?
Date: 7 Mar 92 23:11:23 GMT
Organization: Cube Technologies

I'm sure this has been hashed over before, but when I tried to compile
a file today, Think C gave me a "code overflow error."  What, pray
tell, is that, and how do I get around it?

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Creath                 "When I was a boy I was told that anybody could
[e-mail]   become president; I'm beginning to believe it."
                                                           -- Clarence Darrow

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Ray Fischer)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1992 06:21:34 GMT

[e-mail] (Peter Creath) writes ...
>I'm sure this has been hashed over before, but when I tried to compile
>a file today, Think C gave me a "code overflow error."  What, pray
>tell, is that, and how do I get around it?

RTFM!

Page 488 of the Think C user manual: "code overflow: You have more
than 32K of code or data in one file."  It took me 15 seconds to find
the error description in the manual.  I suggest you consider doing the
same next time you get an error.  If you want to get around it,
Read The F'ing Manual.

Sheesh.

Ray
[e-mail]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Eric W. Douglas)
Date: 8 Mar 92 08:14:59 GMT


[e-mail] (Ray Fischer) writes:

>[e-mail] (Peter Creath) writes ...
>>I'm sure this has been hashed over before, but when I tried to compile
>>a file today, Think C gave me a "code overflow error."  What, pray
>>tell, is that, and how do I get around it?

>RTFM!

[ four lines deleted listing correct manual pages to read ... ]

>Read The F'ing Manual.

>Sheesh.

>Ray
>[e-mail]

I hope that inflamatory responses like this one don't discourage people
to ask questions... remember, this groups belongs to everyone...

- --eric

* | Eric W. Douglas             Technojock               [phone] | *
* | I'net: [e-mail]      [e-mail] | *
* | AppleLink: STUDIO.D      Compuserve: 76170,1472       AOL: EWDOUGLAS | *
* |                "if q -> p, and not p, then not q. NOT!"              | *

---------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Douglas Bitting)
Subject: How to tell idle time?
Date: 27 Feb 92 20:32:05 GMT
Organization: You gotta be kidding me!


Quick question (hopefully).  How does one tell how long the mac has
been idle like the way AfterDark, etc. do?  Is this really ugly or is
it something that can be done elegantly and simply?

Code would be more than welcome if this is ugly... :-)

Thanks!
--Doug

--
 ...Doug Bitting... || "But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first
                    ||  of all pure; then peace loving, considerate,
[e-mail] ||  submissive, full of mercy, and good fruit,
[e-mail]  ||  impartial and sincere."  -- James 3:17
--
--
Velilind's Laws of Experimentation:
   1.  If reproducibility may be a problem, conduct the test only once.
   2.  If a straight line fit is required, obtain only two data points.



- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter N Lewis)
Subject:  How to tell idle time?
Organization: NCRPDA, Curtin University
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 07:36:35 GMT

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Douglas Bitting) writes:

> Quick question (hopefully).  How does one tell how long the mac has
> been idle like the way AfterDark, etc. do?  Is this really ugly or is
> it something that can be done elegantly and simply?

All I do in Finger is to simply track the keyboard matrix (with GetKeys)
and the mouse pos (GetMouse - I have to use the global in fact, because
GetMouse isn't available to a background only app).

Here is some code:

 type
  keyLongMap = array[1..4] of longInt;

 var
  lastmoved: longInt;  { Last time the cursor was moved, used for idle timing }
  lastpos: point;
  lastkeymap: keyLongMap;

 function IdleSince: longInt;  {TickCount at last no idle time}
 begin
  IdleSince := lastmoved;
 end;

 procedure MyGetMouse (var pt: point); { Handles not having quickdraw around }
  var
   mousep: ^point;
 begin
  mousep := POINTER($830);
  pt := mousep^;
 end;

 procedure TrackIdle;
  var
   pt: point;
   km: keyLongMap;
 begin
  pt := lastpos;
  MyGetMouse(lastpos);
  if (abs(pt.h - lastpos.h) > 2) or (abs(pt.v - lastpos.v) > 2) then begin
   lastmoved := TickCount;
  end
  else begin
   GetKeys(keyMap(km));
   if (km[1] <> lastkeymap[1]) or (km[2] <> lastkeymap[2]) or (km[3] <> lastkeymap[3]) or (km[4] <> lastkeymap[4]) then begin
    lastmoved := TickCount;
    lastkeymap := km;
   end;
  end;
 end;

 procedure InitTrackIdle;
 begin
  MyGetMouse(lastpos);
  lastmoved := TickCount;
  GetKeys(keyMap(lastkeymap));
 end;

HTH,
   Peter.

> Velilind's Laws of Experimentation:
>    1.  If reproducibility may be a problem, conduct the test only once.
>    2.  If a straight line fit is required, obtain only two data points.

:-).  An extension thats actually quite useful:
     3.  If the straight line must go thru the origin, add the negation
         of all points in the data set to the data set (give 2N points)

______________________________________________________________________
Peter N Lewis, NCRPDA, Curtin University      [e-mail]
GPO Box U1987, Perth WA 6001, AUSTRALIA            FAX: [phone]





- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tim Dierks, ToyMeister, Cray abuser)
Date: 5 Mar 92 16:19:22 GMT
Organization: MacDTS, Apple Computer

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter N Lewis) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Douglas Bitting) writes:
>
> > Quick question (hopefully).  How does one tell how long the mac has
> > been idle like the way AfterDark, etc. do?  Is this really ugly or is
> > it something that can be done elegantly and simply?
>
> All I do in Finger is to simply track the keyboard matrix (with GetKeys)
> and the mouse pos (GetMouse - I have to use the global in fact, because
> GetMouse isn't available to a background only app).

[...]

>  procedure MyGetMouse (var pt: point); { Handles not having quickdraw around }
>   var
>    mousep: ^point;
>  begin
>   mousep := POINTER($830);
>   pt := mousep^;
>  end;

A better way to do this without using a low memory global is to call

OSEventAvail(0,&theEvent);     // Omit the & if you're a Pascal programmer

This will return a null event in theEvent, with the where set to the
current mouse position (and modifiers correctly set, too, as a bonus).
It doesn't give up time, can be called from an interrupt task, and
it far more compatible than using the Mouse global.

Tim Dierks
MacDTS, but I speak for myself

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tim Dierks, ToyMeister, Cray abuser)
Date: 5 Mar 92 16:26:58 GMT
Organization: MacDTS, Apple Computer

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter N Lewis) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Douglas Bitting) writes:
>
> > Quick question (hopefully).  How does one tell how long the mac has
> > been idle like the way AfterDark, etc. do?  Is this really ugly or is
> > it something that can be done elegantly and simply?
>
> All I do in Finger is to simply track the keyboard matrix (with GetKeys)
> and the mouse pos (GetMouse - I have to use the global in fact, because
> GetMouse isn't available to a background only app).

[...]

>  procedure MyGetMouse (var pt: point); { Handles not having quickdraw around }
>   var
>    mousep: ^point;
>  begin
>   mousep := POINTER($830);
>   pt := mousep^;
>  end;

A better way to do this without using a low memory global is to call

OSEventAvail(0,&theEvent);     // Omit the & if you're a Pascal programmer

This will return a null event in theEvent, with the where set to the
current mouse position (and modifiers correctly set, too, as a bonus).
It doesn't give up time, can be called from an interrupt task, and
it far more compatible than using the Mouse global.

Tim Dierks
MacDTS, but I speak for myself

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tim Dierks, ToyMeister, Cray abuser)
Date: 5 Mar 92 16:27:14 GMT
Organization: MacDTS, Apple Computer

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter N Lewis) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Douglas Bitting) writes:
>
> > Quick question (hopefully).  How does one tell how long the mac has
> > been idle like the way AfterDark, etc. do?  Is this really ugly or is
> > it something that can be done elegantly and simply?
>
> All I do in Finger is to simply track the keyboard matrix (with GetKeys)
> and the mouse pos (GetMouse - I have to use the global in fact, because
> GetMouse isn't available to a background only app).

[...]

>  procedure MyGetMouse (var pt: point); { Handles not having quickdraw around }
>   var
>    mousep: ^point;
>  begin
>   mousep := POINTER($830);
>   pt := mousep^;
>  end;

A better way to do this without using a low memory global is to call

OSEventAvail(0,&theEvent);     // Omit the & if you're a Pascal programmer

This will return a null event in theEvent, with the where set to the
current mouse position (and modifiers correctly set, too, as a bonus).
It doesn't give up time, can be called from an interrupt task, and
it far more compatible than using the Mouse global.

Tim Dierks
MacDTS, but I speak for myself

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Matt Mora)
Date: 6 Mar 92 18:36:16 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, California

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tim Dierks, ToyMeister, Cray abuser) writes:

>A better way to do this without using a low memory global is to call

>OSEventAvail(0,&theEvent);     // Omit the & if you're a Pascal programmer

>This will return a null event in theEvent, with the where set to the

Yeah but what is the performance hit in calling OSEvent? I sure that its
faster to read a LMG than top call the trap.


Matt

- --
___________________________________________________________
Matthew Mora                |   my Mac  [e-mail]
SRI International           |  my unix  [e-mail]
___________________________________________________________

---------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Siek)
Subject: How to use MacsBug
Date: 28 Feb 92 10:36:16 GMT
Organization: Uni-GH Paderborn, Germany

Hello networld,

Please forgive if this is a dumb RTFM question but how do I use the MacsBug
lowlevel debugger?  I have browsed the whole MPW documentaion and the CD
ROM with the 6.2.1 MacsBug version but I found no clue.  Please give me
a little hint.

Thanks alot !
        Jerry



- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ray Fischer)
Subject:  How to use MacsBug
Date: 1 Mar 92 22:17:13 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.

[e-mail] (Gerald Siek) writes ...
>Please forgive if this is a dumb RTFM question but how do I use the MacsBug
>lowlevel debugger?  I have browsed the whole MPW documentaion and the CD
>ROM with the 6.2.1 MacsBug version but I found no clue.  Please give me
>a little hint.

Once installed (by copying to the system folder then restarting) MacsBug
is entered by either pressing the programmer's interrupt button on the Mac,
or by executing a Debug or DebugStr trap in a program.  Once in MacsBug,
typing a ? will display a help menu.

There is also a MacsBug reference manual published by Addison-Wesley which
goes into considerable detail about MacsBug and how to use it..

Ray
[e-mail]



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Kent Sandvik)
Date: 6 Mar 92 20:37:38 GMT
Organization: MacDTS Mongols

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gerald Siek) writes:
>
> Hello networld,
>
> Please forgive if this is a dumb RTFM question but how do I use the MacsBug
> lowlevel debugger?  I have browsed the whole MPW documentaion and the CD
> ROM with the 6.2.1 MacsBug version but I found no clue.  Please give me
> a little hint.

Purchase "MacsBug Reference and Debugging Guide for MacsBug version 6.2" from
APDA. It's a nice, cheap manual that also has a lot of useful information
about the MacOS runtime environment and debugging.

Cheers,
Kent

- --
Kent Sandvik - Apple DTS  - Dynamic Language Evangelist
[e-mail]
All opinions expressed are my own, and not related to any company or
organization.           Have fun!

---------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Divya AL Sundaram)
Subject: Advice Needed :     SoftPC
Date: 2 Mar 92 00:13:56 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University, College of Engineering

Hi all,
    I am currently considering buying a Macintosh IICI or better.
    I wanted some advice on this purchase. I need a system that will
    allow me to run Unix/X-windows .... and also be able to write
    programs for DOS Machines. I heard about SoftPC and was wondering
    how good it is. Will it let me essentially use the Mac as a slow
    PC? Can I use Borland C++ and Other PC compilers etc ... What
    about running Windows (I write MS-Windows Programs)? and TSR's
    etc.  What are its limitations? Any other suggestions? I am a PC
    owner and am fed up with it. However, I make a living writing DOS
    programs and want to keep on living :). I need to find a system that
    I enjoy using (the Mac II ci) which will allow me the greatest
    flexibility.

    If you have any good suggestions, please e-mail me.
    Thanks in advance ..
    AL



- -------------------------

From: berger@median (Mike Berger)
Subject:  Advice Needed : SoftPC
Date: 2 Mar 92 18:26:49 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

[e-mail] (Divya AL Sundaram) writes:
>Hi all,
>    I am currently considering buying a Macintosh IICI or better.
>    I wanted some advice on this purchase. I need a system that will
>    allow me to run Unix/X-windows .... and also be able to write
>    programs for DOS Machines. I heard about SoftPC and was wondering
>    how good it is. Will it let me essentially use the Mac as a slow
>    PC? Can I use Borland C++ and Other PC compilers etc ... What
>    about running Windows (I write MS-Windows Programs)? and TSR's
>    etc.  What are its limitations? Any other suggestions? I am a PC
>    owner and am fed up with it. However, I make a living writing DOS
>    programs and want to keep on living :). I need to find a system that
>    I enjoy using (the Mac II ci) which will allow me the greatest
>    flexibility.
*----
If you don't like the PC world, you won't find it any more pleasant
emulating it on a Mac.  And whenever you run into a bug, you won't
know whether to blame it on your code or development environment.

If you make your living with PC's, but prefer a Mac for entertainment,
buy a cheap Mac for your off hours.  Don't spend a premium price
on an inferior development system for DOS.
--
    Mike Berger
    Department of Statistics, University of Illinois
    AT&TNET     217-244-6067
    Internet    [e-mail]



- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Q)
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1992 05:48:00 GMT

    What about RunPCRemote?  Doesn't it let you 'slave' a pc to your
mac?  I think there is a network version that lets you run an ibm hooked
up to your lan from a mac.  There is also a version that lets you hook
up a serial cable between your mac and ibm.  The ads for them seem
impressive enough, I think they also got reviewed in the Computer Shopper.
They mentioned that it was slow, but I don't think the Computer Shopper is
a good source of mac info either.
    Basically I'm in the same boat.  My school gave me a ps2, but
I *love* macs, and Im going to buy a ci or si.  But I would still like
to use my old computer.  Does anyone out there have any firsthand experiance
with RunPCremote?  If so, can you give a brief description of it?

                    Carlo Quinonez
                    [e-mail]


- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alexandre Sasha Polozoff)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 92 07:42:18 GMT
Organization: Sharpstone Trail Productions - Austin Texas USA


In article <[e-mail]> (comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.programmer), berger@median (Mike Berger) writes:
> [e-mail] (Divya AL Sundaram) writes:
> >Hi all,
> >    I am currently considering buying a Macintosh IICI or better.
> >    I wanted some advice on this purchase. I need a system that will
> >    allow me to run Unix/X-windows .... and also be able to write
> >    programs for DOS Machines. I heard about SoftPC and was wondering

about it's performance?

Even on a IIci SoftPC is slow and clunkly.  On Nortons I think it
rates 1.41 with 1.0 being a standard XT !  I think developing any
sort of serious software would be most exasperating in that circumstance.
  SoftPC is good for doing small DOS related tasks that you need to
do at home but don't need an extra DOS box.  I use it strictly for
editing documents and even then I'm not pleased with its performance.


- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandre Sasha Polozoff            Internet    [e-mail]
                                    CI$            73467,252
                                    Voice        512/218-1178
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharpstone Trail Productions        [e-mail]
8903 Sharpstone Trail                uunet!trail.sharpstone.com!info
Austin, TX  78717
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Thad Humphries)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1992 23:39:17 -0500

 DA> From: [e-mail] (Divya AL Sundaram)
 DA> Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
 DA> Organization: Michigan State University, College of Engineering
 DA>
 DA> Hi all,
 DA>     I am currently considering buying a Macintosh IICI or better.
 DA>     I wanted some advice on this purchase. I need a system that will
 DA>     allow me to run Unix/X-windows .... and also be able to write
 DA>     programs for DOS Machines. I heard about SoftPC and was wondering
 DA>     how good it is. Will it let me essentially use the Mac as a slow
 DA>     PC? Can I use Borland C++ and Other PC compilers etc ... What
 DA>     about running Windows (I write MS-Windows Programs)? and TSR's
 DA>     etc.  What are its limitations? Any other suggestions? I am a PC
 DA>     owner and am fed up with it. However, I make a living writing DOS
 DA>     programs and want to keep on living :). I need to find a system that
 DA>     I enjoy using (the Mac II ci) which will allow me the greatest
 DA>     flexibility.


I've used SoftPC for almost 2 years as the only Mac programmer in a team of DOS weanies (why, when 70% of the client base was Mac, I don't know).  Anyway, on a good day with a IIci, SoftPC AT doesn't quite make a 6MHz 286.  And you've never seen anything as slow as Excel in SoftPC.  Most abacus users I've seen are faster.

If you don't want A/UX on your Mac, I might suggest a cheap 386 or 486 clone and UNIX (many vendors, Motif and OPEN LOOK/XView included, about $2K or SUN's Solaris).


- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Greg Trimper)
Date: 5 Mar 92 01:23:59 GMT
Organization: Enterprise Data Systems Incorporated, Appleton WI

[e-mail] (Alexandre Sasha Polozoff) writes:


>Even on a IIci SoftPC is slow and clunkly.  On Nortons I think it
>rates 1.41 with 1.0 being a standard XT !

Interesting.  You must have the Universal SOftPC.  SoftAT 2.5, whick I have,
get a Norton SI of 8.7 on my SE/30.  That's a 16MHz 68030 emulating a
10Mhz 286/7 EGA.

And I have run Turbo Pascal 6.0 on it, and found it 'acceptable.'  I installed
Win3, and watched performance crawl to a world record low.  BUT,
for many DOS tasks, including programming, SoftAT 2.5 (NOTE THE _AT_) is
acceptable.     I would think that SoftAT would be even faster on your
ci (in B&W if you use internal video, that is)  It also helps to use a
SoftPC Disk file instead of a mac folder as driveE to do your work in.

Greg Trimper   [e-mail]

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alexandre Sasha Polozoff)
Date: 5 Mar 92 21:22:35 GMT
Organization: Sharpstone Trail Productions - Austin Texas USA


In article <[e-mail]> (comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.programmer), [e-mail] (Greg Trimper) writes:
> [e-mail] (Alexandre Sasha Polozoff) writes:
>
>
> >Even on a IIci SoftPC is slow and clunkly.  On Nortons I think it
> >rates 1.41 with 1.0 being a standard XT !
>
> Interesting.  You must have the Universal SOftPC.  SoftAT 2.5, whick I have,
> get a Norton SI of 8.7 on my SE/30.  That's a 16MHz 68030 emulating a
> 10Mhz 286/7 EGA.
>
> And I have run Turbo Pascal 6.0 on it, and found it 'acceptable.'  I installed
> Win3, and watched performance crawl to a world record low.  BUT,
> for many DOS tasks, including programming, SoftAT 2.5 (NOTE THE _AT_) is
> acceptable.     I would think that SoftAT would be even faster on your
> ci (in B&W if you use internal video, that is)  It also helps to use a
> SoftPC Disk file instead of a mac folder as driveE to do your work in.
>
> Greg Trimper   [e-mail]
>

That is correct.  It is Universal SoftPC and not SoftAt.  Having no
experience with SoftAt I can not comment on it's performance.  However
IMHO SoftPC is not a viable alternative.  Especially if you are looking
to do any sort of programming tasks.  And I do have a SoftPC drive
E.  I've noticed little difference in response whether I use the SoftPC
drive or a Macintosh folder.  It definately looks like SoftAt should
ones preference.

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandre Sasha Polozoff            Internet    [e-mail]
                                    CI$         73467,252
                                    Voice       512/218-1178
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharpstone Trail Productions        [e-mail]
8903 Sharpstone Trail               uunet!trail.sharpstone.com!info
Austin, TX  78717
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

- -------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Maioriello)
Date: 6 Mar 92 15:38:08 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

>That is correct.  It is Universal SoftPC and not SoftAt.  Having no
>experience with SoftAt I can not comment on it's performance.  However
>IMHO SoftPC is not a viable alternative.  Especially if you are looking
>to do any sort of programming tasks.  And I do have a SoftPC drive
>E.  I've noticed little difference in response whether I use the SoftPC
>drive or a Macintosh folder.  It definately looks like SoftAt should
>ones preference.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Alexandre Sasha Polozoff            Internet    [e-mail]

I use SoftAT on a Mac IIsi and booooy is it slow.  I think somebody was making
a joke when they compared it to an AT.  Even a slow AT.  But with SoftNode it
does give me access to our campus wide network and the Novell fileservers
that lie upon it.  I use SoftAt to run the various Netware utilities - for
this purpose it works, but I can't recommend it for most DOS apps -
particularly those that are graphics intensive.

Hope this helps.

Ed Maioriello                                   edm @ athena.cs.uga.edu
University Computing & Networking Services           edm @ aisun1.ai.uga.edu
University of Georgia  ----------------------------------------------------
Athens, Ga. 30602      |"There is no problem so big that it can't be run
(404)-542-5162         | away from." - Linus Van Pelt

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: david (David Bourne)
Date: 6 Mar 92 20:41:58 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK

> That is correct.  It is Universal SoftPC and not SoftAt.  Having no
> experience with SoftAt I can not comment on it's performance.  However
> IMHO SoftPC is not a viable alternative.  Especially if you are looking
> to do any sort of programming tasks.  And I do have a SoftPC drive
> E.  I've noticed little difference in response whether I use the SoftPC
> drive or a Macintosh folder.  It definately looks like SoftAt should
> ones preference.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Alexandre Sasha Polozoff            Internet    [e-mail]
>                                     CI$         73467,252
>                                     Voice       512/218-1178
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sharpstone Trail Productions        [e-mail]
> 8903 Sharpstone Trail               uunet!trail.sharpstone.com!info
> Austin, TX  78717
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
I use SoftPC to program using MS Fortran and the SoftPC side works well
enough. The Fortran compiler is slow even on an IBM machine. My only problem
now is a bug with the latest version of SoftPC and the math co-processor.

David Bourne
OU HSC College of Pharmacy
1110 N. Stonewall Ave
Oklahoma City, OK, 73117-1223
[phone]
[e-mail]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: [e-mail] (Scott Bronson)
Date: 6 Mar 92 20:37:14 GMT

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Q) writes:


>    What about RunPCRemote?  Doesn't it let you 'slave' a pc to your
>mac?  I think there is a network version that lets you run an ibm hooked
>up to your lan from a mac.  There is also a version that lets you hook
>up a serial cable between your mac and ibm.  The ads for them seem
>impressive enough, I think they also got reviewed in the Computer Shopper.
>They mentioned that it was slow, but I don't think the Computer Shopper is
>a good source of mac info either.

About all I would use RunPC for is to create a headless server.  It is
rather slow at transferrring screens (if you think the 10 meg per second
NuBus bottleneck made updates slow on a Mac, wait until you see 230 K
per second).  This bottleneck is not so bad when using, for instance,
Excel or Tetris, but Wing Commander II is out.

Frankly, all RunPC does is allow you to use your PC from a window in your
Mac.  I think most people might be able to save some headaches by spending
another hundred dollars and getting a VGA monitor and putting them side
by side on your desk.  RunPC is a neat idea, but in the end, it's just
another thing that can go wrong and cause incompatibilities, IMHO.

If anybody is going to follow up to this, please Email me or move the thread
over to comp.sys.mac.apps.

    - Scott

---------------------------

End of C.S.M.P. Digest
**********************