RE: Some thoughts about GS

[Tim . Bissell]

Helge Wrote:

> > + better 'reflection' (rtti) than Java
> 
> Why is ObjC reflection better ? I wouldn't say so, IMHO Java has much
> nicer reflection classes.
> 
> The real + is forwarding (maybe you had this in mind).


Yep -- that's what I was thinking of; too long since I used it!

> > + Java
> > 
> > + 'Free' garbage collection
> 
> The same is true for GNU ObjC.

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

> > + Interfaces are cleaner than Protocols
> 
> 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:

Collection *foo = [[Hashtable alloc] init];

(Collection*)foo

and [foo isKindOfClass:[Collection protocol]];

like you can in Java, rather than the cumbersome

id<Collection> foo = ...

(id<Collection>)foo

and [foo conformsTo:@protocol(Collection)]

> > + no link stage
> 
> like with bundles ... (actually you mean 'no static link stage')

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

> > + variable declarations are statements
> 
> Depends. Is nice for quick hacks, but clutters code.

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

> > If gcj ever works with Jigs, to get the speed up and size
> > down, Java could be the 'killer app' needed to get GNUstep
> > programming going.
> 
> A Java bridge is certainly a great feature. But Qt would be even more
> 'killer' here given that gcj generated Java classes are already C++
> classes ...

Only if you like the QT classes.  I guess my point is that the things I
love about *step are the UI, tools and the way the libraries hang together,
rather than the underlying language - and I guess there I diverge from
Ian Mondragon's PoV. Java is by no means perfect, but is usable, and with
GNUstep APIs would be far more pleasant to use than with Sun's I/O libraries
and AWT.  Anyway, I 'want' GNUstep much more that I 'want' Java so I'll
happily code in Obj-C (spare time permitting!)

I still curse wildly several times a day when I run into Windoze
deficiencies,
even after two and a half year of NT on my desk, but Java was much easier to
get used to...  Thank Ghod I've never had to (re)learn C++!  Oops, sorry,
that
was blatant flamebait... please ignore it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail 
disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to 
http://www.drkw.com/email-disclaimer.html or contact the sender.
----------------------------------------------------------------------