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