[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Re[6]: EOKeyValueCoding

From: Philippe C.D. Robert
Subject: Re: Re[6]: EOKeyValueCoding
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 21:38:16 +0100

On Sun, 24 Feb 2002 21:04:31 +0100 (CET)
Manuel Guesdon <address@hidden> wrote:
>  >| >> | This isn't an issue any more. We should place a KVC implementation in
>  >| >> | FoundationExt if we want to support deprecated OS's like OPENSTEP.
>  >| >> | Indeed because KVC is part of Foundation it's much easier now, since 
>  >| >> you
>  >| >> | don't need to maintain runtime specific code in GDL :-)
>  >| >
>  >| > I agree :-) on the last sentence but in this case, why putting "base 
>  >| > KVC" in FoundationExt an not base  ?
>  >| 
>  >| As I wrote, to support old Foundations which do *not* have KVC in 
>  >| Foundation (like the Foundation of OPENSTEP). I would *copy* the code 
>  >| over to FoundationExt (so it's contained in both libraries).
> You're right. I've forgotten this one.

IMHO this would be a bad move from our side. Of course old code should be
supported whenever possible, but much, much more important is IMHO to be and
remain compatible with Cocoa/Apple. We have to be very careful not to introduce
incompatibilities on basic stuff like that. 

BTW who actually has FoundationExt installed who does not really use GDL?
Philippe C.D. Robert
Software Engineer
Silicon Graphics, Inc.

reply via email to

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