[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs 23 Mac port
From: |
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs 23 Mac port |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:44:21 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (Shijō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
>>>>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:11:01 -0600, Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> said:
YM> If you mean Emacs 23 Mac port, see the following message in
YM> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00148.html
> So are you saying Carbon *is* a good long-term solution?
> Or are you saying it's supported right now and that's good enough?
I mean what's currently supported in 64-bit Carbon is expected to
survive for a certain period of time, because Apple has already made
drastic cut for Carbon on the 64-bit transition. Of course, I can't
speak for Apple.
> Carbon was not supposed to get a 64-bit upgrade when we first
> discussed your Mac port IIRC; obviously it has one now.
Typical misunderstanding about 64-bit Carbon. It was the GUI portion
of HIToolbox that was not supposed to get a 64-bit upgrade from the
beginning. Not the whole Carbon. That's why I ported only the GUI
part from Carbon HIToolbox to Cocoa AppKit.
By the way, which is in your mind when you speak "Carbon", C APIs in
general or the Carbon framework (i.e.,
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/)? The latter does not
include Core Foundation, Core Graphics, Core Text, or Image I/O, all
of which are C APIs supported and legitimate even in iOS.
> I think the Emacs maintainers still prefer the NS port because of
> the GNUStep support.
As I'm saying in the beginning of README-mac file in the Mac port, if
the NS port is good enough for you, then you don't need to try the Mac
port.
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
address@hidden
Re: Emacs 23 Mac port, ken manheimer, 2010/11/17
Re: Emacs 23 Mac port, Leo, 2010/11/30