🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec11.155851.14862@walter.cray.com> toma@baritone (Thomas Arneberg) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.195344.10218@reed.edu> bowman@reed.edu (BoBoRamDos) writes:
>Can someone tell me how similar MPW is to the C-shell in Unix? I've been an
>avid USER of the Mac fan since the early days ('84), but to this day I have 
>never PROGRAMMED on the Mac. I'm too hooked on vi, make, history (!), grep, 
>awk, pipes, shell scripts, and other features of Unix on my SparcStation.
>
>Also, isn't it true that MPW is the only platform on which you can program
>in C++? If not, what other product is there? (A related question -- does
>anyone know if MPW C++ supports templates?)

Anyone who likes working with UNIX will find moving to MPW very pleasant. In
fact, there are oodles of aliases already in place to MPW commands that map
to their UNIX counterparts. The script language is very powerful (though a
bit strange where pattern matchin is concerend - at least I always have to
look things up, which is not hard) and has been pointed out before MPW is
still really the only way to go if you want to have good control other
source-code versioning. MPW is not nearly as fast as THINK C, but then THINK
C lacks most of the power, too. As to C++ , yes at the moment MPW is the
only way to get it (Apple uses AT&T's cfront). THINK C has a C++ subset, but
it is only a subset. MPW is also the only way to go if you want to work with
MacApp which is far and away much larger than TCL (THINK C's object class
library) though the latter is good, too. Also, a port of gcc 2.x is in the
works (not through GNU since R. Stallman doesn't like the Mac...) and that'll
run under MPW.

Hope this helps.

  ** Ken **