Quote

Originally posted by AriosSw:
**Perhaps a porting layer would more accurately describe it. Just a bunch of the commonly used functions that have names very similar to the real Mac functions, but would instead write to rez or bin files. That way, the actual app code would have to undergo few changes to write to the new files and this "layer" would just transcribe the data into the correct format.
**

Yes. My thought as well.

------------------
Mac<-->PC pilot file Conversions: (url="http://"http://phair.csh.rit.edu/~seant/EV/PilotConvert/")http://phair.csh.rit...V/PilotConvert/(/url)
"Create enigmas, not explanations." -Robert Smithson

Quote

Originally posted by AriosSw:
No no no. I do not mean an official port, which would be completely unnecesary. Perhaps a porting layer would more accurately describe it. Just a bunch of the commonly used functions that have names very similar to the real Mac functions, but would instead write to rez or bin files. That way, the actual app code would have to undergo few changes to write to the new files and this "layer" would just transcribe the data into the correct format.

This is almost exactly what I'm doing with MissionComputer for Windows, except that it's my ResFrame layer that's being ported rather than the Resource Manager, and I'm using a custom SQL-based format (which will be accompanied by a convertor) instead of editing .rez or MacBinary natively.

------------------
David Arthur | (url="http://"http://davidarthur.evula.net/")davidarthur.evula.net(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/")EV-Nova.net(/url)
Truth! Justice! Freedom! And A Hard-Boiled Egg!