[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: +initialize vs. +(void)initialize?
|
From: |
David Ayers |
|
Subject: |
Re: +initialize vs. +(void)initialize? |
|
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:15:28 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 |
Adam Fedor wrote:
> That's probably because NSObject indirectly includes Object. That's been
> fixed in CVS now, so it will be in the next release.
>
> Besides, you'd want to complain to the gcc bug list about Object.h
>
Hello Adam,
hello Larry,
Sorry for the late reply. Yes, this indeed is an issue wrt including
Object.h in OpenStep implementations which should now be fixed for most
code thanks to Adam.
It is not a bug in Object.h as even Apple's Object.h declares:
+ initialize;
(I.e. it has id as return type implicitly.) So I guess you may look at
this as an inconsistency introduced with the OpenStep API, and you will
still see the warning if your file happens to need Object.h for any reason.
Cheers,
David Ayers