__/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Wednesday 11 October 2006 21:54 \__
>
> "Peter Hayes" <not_in_use@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:20061011213232316+0100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> In <ukovv3-5ju.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>
>>> OTOH, if an OSX app is entirely self contained then how can any sort
>>> of code reuse occur?
>>
>> Won't most apps have specific code that isn't likely to be of use
>> elsewhere except in narrowly defined cases.
>
> Yes, but most of the functionality in an app comes from re-use.
> Otherwises, every program would have to re-implement its own keyboard
> interrupt handling, USB support, mouse configuration, video timing, support
> for screen readers (for the visually impaired), support for all sorts of
> soundcards, supports for different types of storage medias (IDE harddrives,
> SATA harddrives, USB keys, network drives, RAM drives, etc.)
>
> Then there'd be stuff like drawing buttons, animating them getting
> pressed downwards, adding code to grey-out disabled buttoms. Drawing drop
> down menus, making sure the drop down menus appear above the window frame,
> instead of beneath it, highlighting the currently selected menu item, etc.
>
> Instead, code for this is supplied once, and re-used by multiple
> applications.
>
>
>>> Aren't you just doing what ANY OS could do with a
>>> mere static link rather than the dynamic linking which is customary.
>>
>> Makes for extremely easy uninstall - just drag the app to the trash.
>
> This is indeed one very attractive aspect of Apple's design.
Like trashing the USB pen in order to unmount it (for safe removal)? I think
not... *grin*
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Avoid missing ball for higher score"
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 121 total, 1 running, 118 sleeping, 0 stopped, 2 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
