[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNUstep base vs libobjc

From: Adrian Robert
Subject: Re: GNUstep base vs libobjc
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 07:49:23 -0400

On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:55 AM, Sašo Kiselkov wrote:

Quoting percy tiglao <address@hidden>:

I do not feel like stepping all the way into the NeXT framework, but
I'd like to use Objc as a development language (I'm going to be
building games, and portability to both Windows and Linux is a top
issue) If you are curious, I'm planning on SDL/OpenGL in Obj-C

You can, of course, use the plain libobjc with your classes
derived directly from Object, but then you're throwing away all the comfort of OpenStep. OpenStep's Objective-C part is basically split into two library:

- FoundationKit (gnustep-base), which is a library of abstract base classes containing things like unicode strings, object containers and neat features such as semi-automatic garbage collection (makes memory management a _LOT_
easier without the overhead of a full garbage collector).

- ApplicationKit (gnustep-gui&back) is a library of graphical elements such as buttons, windows, sliders, menus etc. for building graphical applications.

The reason why this is kept separate is to allow developers to develop both gui and non-gui applications with the full comfort of Foundation and it's prepared solutions to many common problems. Personally, I'd recomment in your case to
make use of Foundation (gnustep-base), but not AppKit.

I second this. I developed a fairly involved application just using libobjc, and ended up writing myself a lot of basic facilities that Foundation gives you for free -- for data structures and things like that. A lot of time spent that I didn't need to. Also, if you need them, there are additional packages like netclasses just mentioned on the list, and an SQL database wrapper library that just use Foundation and are very useful.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]