Re: Some thoughts about GS

[Helge Hess]

Tim.Bissell@dresdnerkb.com wrote:
[GC]
> Yebbut Java had it from day one - you still have to use 'retain', 'release'
> etc.
> (even if they are no-ops) to keep your code portable to (say) MacOSX

You mean portable to the MacOSX Foundation library. (Almost) nothing
prevents one from using GNU ObjC on MacOSX ?!
The situation is pretty much the same like with Java.

> > Why so ? Actually they are identical, aren't they ?
> 
> Protocols are second-class citizens compared to types; it's just
> syntactic sugar, but I'd prefer to be able to to use:

Ok. You mean that they have the same syntax like classes. This may or
may not be an advantage. Eg a side-effect is, that they live in the same
namespace, which is sometimes annoying (eg @interface
NSObject<NSObject>).

> Kind of, except you have to explicitly load bundles (I think), and in
> Java every class is a bundle with

No. You can use the _objc_class_lookup callback to implement ClassLoader
like mechanisms. Indeed our SKYRiX server uses this extensivly.

> Subjective, but I like declaring variables where I use them; I guess
> I could use curlies.  But for (int i=.....) is of great benefit.

Ever tried

- doIt {
for(int i=0...) {}
for(int i=0..) {}
}

and wondered about 'i' symbols declared twice ? ;-)

Greetings
  Helge
-- 
SKYRIX Software AG - http://www.skyrix.com