>minor changes - feedback not only welcomed, but sought! > >:-j > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >Summary: >In order to dispose of a flexible shell/framework for writing one's own >applications in FutureBasic, this document sets out the properties and >methods for different objects within that proposed framework. The framework >would thus be considered to be in two parts: a front end that receives user >input, usually through the event routines of the Mac OS, and a back end that >receives, and reacts on, messages from this front end. >From this description it is clear that: >- the front end should only massage the events > and communicate with the back end; >- it would be possible in some circumstances to have the back end > and the front and as separate processes either on the same machine, > or even on different machines; >- that appleevents could be the mechanism for transmitting the messages. >It is not clear at this point which part, front or back, should be concerned >with display, nor whether the front end builds and keeps a persistant model >of the back end capabilities. Jonathan, This sounds a lot like the Java that we have been doing at school. I sometimes like the idea of using objects like this (Object Oriented Programing) but I personally don't think it would suit the majority of FB programers who have been brought up on the sequential style of the past generations of FB. Do not get me wrong I would use this OOP approach in some of my programs as it provides the flexibility of allowing object embeding, for instance my Maths Equation Editor that I am working on could benifit from being able to define each object, such as a square root, fraction, etc and then that is able to call an object which can call an object and so on until it gets to the innermost object and then it draws each object as it comes back a level. I personally would use this proposed framework for some project where the flexibilty of the OOP can be fully utilised, maybe even in an extremmly simple AI engine? but I feel that the programers on the whole would probably, more likley, go to an already established OOP language such as Java, C++, etc. This is just my opinion and I've probably muddled it up putting it down here, and I am half asleep so please excuse any spelling mistakes. If you really want to develop this framework please do, and send me a copy when you do, I would find a use for it. Ashley ~)~ ============================================================= Ashley Butterworth Email: macbse@... ============================================================= _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com