🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5821.9101231729@s1.sys.uea.ac.uk> cmp8133@information-systems.east-anglia.ac.uk ("S. Hawes") writes:
>I want to buy PowerWindows 2.5 for designing userinterfaces.
>However, I'd like to program in Modula2 using Benchmark's Modula
>2 construction set. Does anyone know whether that's possible using
>PowerWindows?
>I also heard that with the 
>packages comes a 'translation utility'. Is this correct ?

First the good news:

PowerWindows 2.5 supports Modula2.  It mentions TDI (yuck) Modula2
specifically.  I'm not sure about a 'translation utility.'
	Subjectively speaking, PW is a blessing when you're dealing
with menus, lots of gadgets, and such stuff.


Now the bad news:

PowerWindows 2.5 has some bugs which are annoying, at least in the
Manx/Lattice C code generation.  I don't know if this will also
affect Modula2 or other code.

Specifically:
	struct IntuiText 1IText1 ...
	struct MenuItem 1Menu1 ...
	                ^^
		These extraneous digits (always "1") are VERY
		bothersome.  They require editing of the
		generated source code, and they piss me off :(

		Does anyone know what's causing these?
		Left-over debugging statement?

Overall, I agree with whoever said some time ago, something along the
lines that PowerWindows 2.5 has enough bugs to make you want to
rewrite it, but is not quite buggy enough to make it useless enough to
force you to do it.  One of these days ...

				 ___
 ._.  Udo Schuermann		/ | \	"There is no Way to Peace.
 ( )  walrus@wam.umd.edu	\/|\/	 Peace is the Way!"  -- Gandhi.
				 ~~~

In article <1991Jan25.210054.9388@wam.umd.edu> walrus@wam.umd.edu (Udo K 
Schuermann) writes:
> Overall, I agree with whoever said some time ago, something along the
> lines that PowerWindows 2.5 has enough bugs to make you want to
> rewrite it, but is not quite buggy enough to make it useless enough to
> force you to do it.  One of these days ...
> 

     I agree with you ! Power Windows is quite dangerous for your nerves ! 
Happends sometimes that it will GURU in the midle of your work without any 
warnings (and before you could save it). It may also go wild when 
generating the code (especially when you deal with a lot of graphics), 
once the only way I had to go around the bug was to generate the datas in 
2 parts (that means you'll have to modify all the references of one of the 
2 files, by hand since it'll use the same var names for the 2 files). It 
lacks an option to put "chip" in front of the graphic datas for the 
Lattice too.

       You really want to rewrite it yourself in fact, but you never have 
the time. And it is soooo usefull, that you still use it... But you 
definitely wait for something else (or a new version). And note that 
version 2.5 is allready a big improvement from earlier versions (like the 
first one didn't want you to use windows of more than 200 lines, great for 
PAL users)

        JNM

--
These are my own ideas (not LBL's)
" Just make it!", BO in 'BO knows Unix'