🚀 go-pugleaf

oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster) writes:
...concerning why the sumacc compiler is no good...
>The authors of the compiler seem to be unaware that on a Macintosh
>executable code can move while the program is running. Unlike all Macintosh
>compilers, they generate position _dependent_ code, and have a funky
>loader scheme to resolve non-relocatable references at program load
>time. Eventually, the code moves, and all that position dependent code
>points at never-neverland.

Sorry, but this sounds blatantly impossible.  If the code were to move
while the program is running, then *all of the return addresses and
function pointers on the stack would become invalid* and the program
would crash, regardless of what compiler was used to create the program.

Now, I can see that maybe desk accessories might move around,
*but not application programs*.

Still, I will second your opinion that Sumacc is "not recommended".
I abandoned Sumacc a while back for MPW, on the theory that it was not
worth my time to maintain Sumacc when Apple would maintain MPW for me.
Now, of course, I am deeply regretting the fact that I can no longer
run my programs through lint...

PS: Has anybody heard rumours about the forthcoming availability of Lint
for any Mac C compiler??
-- 
Doug Moen
University of Waterloo Computer Graphics Lab
UUCP:     {ihnp4,watmath}!watcgl!kdmoen
INTERNET: kdmoen@cgl.waterloo.edu