[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GModel decision

From: Fred Kiefer
Subject: Re: GModel decision
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 21:14:14 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030821

Gregory John Casamento wrote:
With due respect guys, you're both somewhat wrong. ;)

The problem with Apple's format is that it is a simple ordered archive which is
based on the internal implementation of initWithCoder: for each class, which
can change.  Also, we have no way of knowing what elements appear in what order
in the archive.
Even if we could follow the same encoding scheme, while it might be simple to
make one class match the order of the one on MOSX, it would be a monumental
effort to make them all match considering that the encoding is dependent upon
the internals of the class being encoded.

You seem to have missed this paragraph from a previous mail of Chris Hanson:

>> (3) Mac OS X 10.2 and later support two formats of nib file.  The first
>> is "10.1 and earlier," which is an old-style sequential archive.  The
>> second is "10.2 and later," which is a new-style keyed archive.  Some
>> 10.2 and later classes have features that are only supported in keyed
>> archives (10.2 and later nibs).

I don't have any personal experions here, but if this is true a reverse engineering of the format of this sort of nibs wont be to complicated. Would anybody mind to send me an example? Up to now I only have seen the binary format, which really would be hard to crack.


reply via email to

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