[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [objc-improvements-branch] About to start ObjC++

From: David Ayers
Subject: Re: [objc-improvements-branch] About to start ObjC++
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:05:45 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

Hello Steve,

steve naroff wrote:

When ObjC++ was written, there was thought/hope that the ANSI-C and ANSI-C++ standardization efforts would "converge" (and it would become the "modern" dialect). Since they never did, we are left with two dialects of ObjC (unfortunately...we would prefer to have one:-)

Hmm, is this a subtle suggestion that 'you' ('we' as in Apple?) would prefer to only have ObjC++? Call me paranoid but that thought alone is quite frightening. :-) (But also currently irrelevant.)

Here are some answers to your questions...

Will the objc++ frontend work with the GNU runtime?

Yes. Objective-C++ didn't require any changes to the Apple runtime...the same should be true for the GNU runtime.

This is wonderful news!

Are there any other platform dependencies that you are already aware of (i.e. other that the potential dependency on the Apple Runtime)?


Even better!

IIRC, it was mentioned, that this is a new frontend which will make use of some of the source files (e.g. objc-act.c) in the current objc frontend. I expect that there are some tweaks needed, so we should continue testing the objc frontend of the branch, right?

Absolutely. Layering ObjC atop C++ can potentially introduce regressions...

OK, so once things stabilize on the branch, I'll see if I can churn it through GNUstep.


PS: I realize that ObjC++ has a history on NeXT/Apple's platforms and that you'll want 'your' (aka Apple's) version to be binary compatible on Darwin. So if it turns out that there are quirks that show up on other platforms we should try to solve them in binary compatible fashion wrt Darwin if elegantly possible but I hope you agree with me, that the FSF tree may diverge to gain more portability as there is nothing to be backward compatible too wrt to ObjC++ on anything but Darwin. But from your assurances, I'll assume that this currently a non-issue.

reply via email to

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