[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: C-g crash in C-x C-f (OSX Lion)

From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
Subject: Re: C-g crash in C-x C-f (OSX Lion)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:12:56 +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 Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:03:52 -0800, chad <address@hidden> said:

>> This is alas a common misunderstanding about the Mac port.
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-11/msg00424.html

> As Dan mentioned, these messages from 4 years ago don't paint a very
> accurate current picture.  Adding to the discussion he linked, I'll
> say that the current situation is even worse than the 2007 messages
> imply; in Lion (aka macosx 10.7), the current development tools
> won't build a gui Carbon app, and the situation is only getting
> worse.  The low-level functionality continues to work in a sort of
> zombie legacy model, but it seems clear that the situation will only
> deteriorate over time.

The Mac port doesn't use Carbon for GUI.  On the contrary, it uses
Cocoa AppKit for GUI implementation (otherwise it doesn't work as a
64-bit executable).

I'd like to ask the same question as in


Which is in your mind when you speak "low-level functionality in
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.

> Meanwhile, the Mac port is missing multi-tty, bidi editing, gnutls,
> and lexbind.  It doesn't have integrated themes, packages, Org, or
> CEDET (to name just a few).  It doesn't help GNUstep users at
> all. If xembed catches on, it's unlikely that it'll ever reach the
> Mac port.

If you need Emacs 24-specific features on Mac OS X at the moment, then
you can use not only the NS port, but also the other X11 builds.  And
as I'm saying at the very beginning of the 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.  I guess whether the NS port is sufficient or not
would depend on the personal usage pattern.  Especially, those who
heavily use flyspell-mode would find the NS port insufficient.

Also, I think I've been making rather active and valuable feedbacks in
both bug reporting and bug fixing especially on the platform-specific
part of Emacs, for the bugs I found through the development of the Mac

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu

reply via email to

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