Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!lll-lcc!well!ewhac From: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Disk "Resources": Cross-Post from BIX #2 Message-ID: <5940@well.UUCP> Date: 12 May 88 23:37:11 GMT Reply-To: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) Organization: First National Sperm Bank: Your future is in your hands. Lines: 31 [ Urp! ] David Joiner (talin @ BIX) has some questions for Matt... Schwab -------- amiga/other #329, from talin, 1389 chars, Thu May 12 01:45:09 1988 This is a comment to message 321. -------------------------- More comments to Matt Dillon, if Leo would be so kind... 1. Can the 'generic structurre editing' be a seperate facility from the actual resource/set tools? That is to say, If I write an editor that knows what a Gadget structure looks like, and I don't care to look at any other structure types, I don't need all the structure descriptions. In fact, my suggestion is to have a new resource type 'SDEF' (stands for structure definition) which has a resource name equal to the type of structure it is defining. (I would also want a 'XDEF' which might contain an executable for initializing and handling said structures, for example you load in an 'XDEF/Window', send it a 'New' message, and it returns a fully-initialized window, even if your applicaiton doesn't know how to build one). The SDEFs and XDEFs could be stored in either the same file or a different one (For example, all the 'common' structs would have SDEFs in the System.Set file. Personally I'm not all that interested in editing structures generically, at least not at this point (That's what Patch Editor Construction Set does, and it's a major bitch). Since the CONTENT of any structure is, in my opinion, as important as the format, I really don't see it as being useful for anything but the simplest of structures, but I may be wrong. Specialized resource editors are more what I am interested in writing.