Forum unknown
· Modula-2
#M2Amiga: Some comments.
11 messages in this thread
I do not have the demo disk; I have the full distribution package. It came
with a manual (not as detailed as Benchmark's, about the same level as
TDI's) and one disk. I did NOT have any of the problems described in the
message. I found installation to be a breeze (but slow; the DoMe program
runs F-O-R-E-V-E-R). I agree with the comments about the editor and having
to run the compiler and linker in separate windows. – Steve –
You know, the thing that impressed me most about the Benchmark package
was the 512K "mini-system" boot disk. Shove the disk in the slot, nerve
pinch Amy, up comes Emacs, loads "Hello World" and you're modulating! Press
F2 – compiled, F3 – linked, F4 – runs. Someone who didn't feel like
futzing around or only had 512K could be content right out of the box. Of
course, I started customizing all over the place. Even there the Benchmark
package is very thoughtful with the "Quickload" library modules. Saved me
the trouble of using MakeACV on 'em. The little touches are usually a good
indication of the overall "welldoneness" in almost any endevour. Benchmark
bears that out. — Art
I completely agree. Benchmark's user interface is well thought out, and
probably is the best around. I have to be real careful when comparing
other packages to it, as those packages may be decent, but I've been
completely spoiled by Benchmark. The only feature I would like to see
added to Benchmark is a built-in "Make" facility, so you won't have to
remember the order of compilation for all your modules. Oh, one more thing
(and pretty important too): a source level debugger would REALLY be nice.
TDI at least has the Post-Mortem Debugger. – Steve –
My greatest wish for Benchmark is a non-Emacs editor. I have recently
started using vi at work, and thought that I would hate it worse than
Emacs. I was wrong. Even vi is far superior to Emacs.
My greatest wish for Benchmark is a non-Emacs editor. I have recently
started using vi at work, and thought that I would hate it worse than
Emacs. I was wrong. Even vi is far superior to Emacs.
The operatative word is "least". The post-mortem debugger does nothing
which is of any use to me. What is needed is a full-fledged debugger, with
the ability to set break-points and examine data while the program is
running.
The operatative word is "least". The post-mortem debugger does nothing
which is of any use to me. What is needed is a full-fledged debugger, with
the ability to set break-points and examine data while the program is
running.
Benchmark also needs a settlement of the feud between author and "previous"
distributor. Remember what killed Software Arts / VisiCorp.
../greg
I completely agree. Benchmark's user interface is well thought out, and
probably is the best around. I have to be real careful when comparing
other packages to it, as those packages may be decent, but I've been
completely spoiled by Benchmark. The only feature I would like to see
added to Benchmark is a built-in "Make" facility, so you won't have to
remember the order of compilation for all your modules. Oh, one more thing
(and pretty important too): a source level debugger would REALLY be nice.
TDI at least has the Post-Mortem Debugger. – Steve –
You know, the thing that impressed me most about the Benchmark package
was the 512K "mini-system" boot disk. Shove the disk in the slot, nerve
pinch Amy, up comes Emacs, loads "Hello World" and you're modulating! Press
F2 – compiled, F3 – linked, F4 – runs. Someone who didn't feel like
futzing around or only had 512K could be content right out of the box. Of
course, I started customizing all over the place. Even there the Benchmark
package is very thoughtful with the "Quickload" library modules. Saved me
the trouble of using MakeACV on 'em. The little touches are usually a good
indication of the overall "welldoneness" in almost any endevour. Benchmark
bears that out. — Art