Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!watdragon!violet!gjditchfield From: gjditchfield@violet.waterloo.edu (Glen Ditchfield) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Resources Message-ID: <7651@watdragon.waterloo.edu> Date: 7 Jul 88 15:03:48 GMT Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu Distribution: comp Lines: 25 In article <434@dogie.edu> terranova@vms.macc.wisc.edu writes: >... Rather than putting windows, menus, icons, >def procs, strings, controls, etc. in resources he would prefer to >hard code everything into the program and make heavy use of #define >statements. Then lsr@apple.apple.com.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) explained: >The main motivation for using resources was to allow programs to be >customized for international markets without recompiling them. All that you >need to localize a progam for France, for example, is the original English >version and a resource manipulation tool (ResEdit, etc.). We could have it both ways, if compilers could be told to put certain data items in resources instead of the global data area. I imagine a compiler for a C superset with ResTools declaration syntax and a "resource" storage class specifier stirred in, or a Pascal compiler that accepts programs with RESOURCE declaration sections. Heck, I bet it's no more than four times as hard as writing a normal compiler. Glen Ditchfield gjditchfield@violet.uwaterloo.ca Office: DC 2517 Dept. of Computer Science, U of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1 Each age thinks itself in possession of the true and only view possible for sensible man -- W. M. Dixon