Re: .gorm vs .gmodel

[Pete French]

> of objects in a system independant way.  It has to have additional
> encoding/decoding methods written for each class.  It tries to achieve a
> degree of portability between GNUstep and OPENSTEP/MacOS-X

Thats an interesting comment - are you implying that somebody wrote
a way of loading .gmodel files under OS42 and OSX ?

I have a lot of interest in writing portable code, and currently the
proliferation of ways to create interfaces hampers this quite badly.
It would be interesting to have a set of categories on standard
OpenStep classes that allow the loading of .gmodel files. You are right
that a .gmodel file may not capture all the nuances of a .gorm file, but
I can see a nice future where we write everything in Gorm, then have
a .gorm -> .gmodel app which creattes .gmodel files to be used when
deploying the codeon OpenStep 4.2, Mac OS X, YellowBox NT etc...

That would be getting far closer to the original "write once, run anywhere"
ethos, which is currently only possibl;e by hand coding creation of the
interface unfortunately.

-bat.