3 ms·
the 1995 docs are probably more useful for most people, especially since the original Inside Macintosh code examples and references are all in Pascal rather tha
by Palomides 7y ago
the 1995 docs are probably more useful for most people, especially since the original Inside Macintosh code examples and references are all in Pascal rather than C
(also I'm more of a System 7 person)
https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/inside-macintosh-cd-rom https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/inside-macintosh-cd-rom
- setpatchaddress 7y agoThe original numbered Inside Mac volumes are frequently more accurate than the later 90's revision. They also contain some useful implementation detail (along with, granted, a good deal of extremely obsolete information if you're targeting later system releases). Edited to add: Pascal interfaces and examples should be easy to follow if you're reasonably proficient in C. The type system is not dissimilar and there's very little difference in control flow.
- RodgerTheGreat 7y agoThere's something wonderfully refreshing to me about the use of Pascal. For most modern platforms, C has always enjoyed the benefit of a sort of "platform nepotism" in which all APIs/ABIs cater to the particulars of its type system. You can certainly use C or C++ to target classic MacOS, but it's always a bit of a second-class citizen. It's fun to imagine how things might have turned out if a different language became the lingua franca of systems programming.
- fzzzy 7y agoPascal is just such a nice language to read, too.