RE: memory use

[cld@xxxxxxxx (Carl Distefano)]

Reply to note from "Brian Henderson"  Sat,
28 Jun 2003 11:08:48 -0700

> The only question I have ... is...Is a macro that's run through
> U2, loaded into memory the same as saying "run blah-blah.mac"?

Of course. Code has to be loaded into memory at runtime in order to
be executed, whatever method you use to launch or store it.

> ... if not then U2 is definitely the way to go.

It's still definitely the way to go. Memory usage isn't the only
consideration. U2 beats RUN on several other counts: portability
(no paths to worry about), speed (U2 frames launch instantly, RUN
has to find the program on disk), interoperability (U2 frames can
call each other to perform discrete tasks), ease of maintenance (a
single customization file, not dozens or hundreds of files).

Can you imagine how unwieldy Xy4 would be if the menus and dialogs
used RUN? The MeNU/DiaLoG system contains over 1,300 XPL programs;
HeLP adds another 3,200 to that! You'd be RUNning around with more
than 4,500 files -- an incoherent mess, and a nightmare to maintain.
The Help/Menu system brilliantly avoids all that. U2 is built into
that system, and draws on the same strengths and efficiencies.

--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxx
http://users.datarealm.com/xywwweb/