Re: GModel decision

[Fred Kiefer]

Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> With due respect guys, you're both somewhat wrong. ;)
>
> The problem with Apple's format is that it is a simple ordered archive which is
> based on the internal implementation of initWithCoder: for each class, which
> can change.  Also, we have no way of knowing what elements appear in what order
> in the archive. 
>
> Even if we could follow the same encoding scheme, while it might be simple to
> make one class match the order of the one on MOSX, it would be a monumental
> effort to make them all match considering that the encoding is dependent upon
> the internals of the class being encoded.

You seem to have missed this paragraph from a previous mail of Chris Hanson:

>> (3) Mac OS X 10.2 and later support two formats of nib file.  The first
>> is "10.1 and earlier," which is an old-style sequential archive.  The
>> second is "10.2 and later," which is a new-style keyed archive.  Some
>> 10.2 and later classes have features that are only supported in keyed
>> archives (10.2 and later nibs).
>>

I don't have any personal experions here, but if this is true a reverse 
engineering of the format of this sort of nibs wont be to complicated. 
Would anybody mind to send me an example? Up to now I only have seen the 
binary format, which really would be hard to crack.

Fred