On Fri, 27 May 2005 09:51:54, George Warner <email@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2005 11:59:07 +0100, Jonathan del Strother
> <email@hidden> wrote:
>> Other than the increased executable size (and the stupidly long
>> compile times), is there any disadvantage to a FAT executable?
>
> Just the name; Marketing doesn't like us calling them FAT so we're changing
> the term to "Universal Architecture Library" (ugh!) or "Universal Binaries",
> etc.
Is FAT discussed here acronym? Otherwise why is it uppercased?
> Personally I like "Multi-Architecture Dynamic Library's" or "MAD Lib's".
> hehe. What? Me worry? ;-)
Mike
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Carbon-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/carbon-dev/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
