[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard
From: |
Helge Hess |
Subject: |
Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard |
Date: |
Sat, 24 Nov 2007 02:04:22 +0100 |
On 23.11.2007, at 19:48, David Chisnall wrote:
Looking at things like SOGO and other WebObjects applications make
it seem so tantalising
Just for the record, SOGo (http://www.scalableogo.org/) is NOT a
WebObjects application. It makes heavy use of (is built around) SOPE
specific REST features (SoObjects) and is far from being compatible
with WO (though it does reuse a lot of WO concepts). It doesn't even
use the ORM features of EOF, just the adaptor and a content storage
framework called GCS.
Ie you definitely can't compile SOGo against gstep-web.
[and yes, SOPE specific stuff is even less documented than WO ;->]
But really, you will never get an ObjC framework as easy to learn as
a framework built on interpreted languages, be it Seaside, RoR or
Zope. If you start with ObjC, you always need to deal with RC, with
makefiles, with GCC, etc etc.
Notably this *does* have significant advantages. You get much higher
speed, you get "native" Unix servers instead of something running in
some "VM", etc etc. The cool thing about ObjC is that its probably
the most low level very high level language ;-)
[Note: ObjC 2.0 GC might make it a lot easier, but only if GNU
manages to provide that too. I think its a major turning point.]
Documentation. Hm, I think its really hard. I always found it hard to
explain why a WO component works different to a PHP page because the
huge advantages live in small details. Probably it comes down to the
fact that developers are not good at documenting stuff for others :-)
You push the Seaside documentation, but the ZopeBook is SUPER GREAT
too, and the RoR tutorials are not bad either.
I completely agree that good documentation is crucial if you want to
make a framework succeed widely. UNLESS you want a built an exact
clone (which probably is true for gstep-gui and gstep-web). In this
case the developers can focus on compat instead of docs.
Greets,
Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://www.helgehess.eu/
- Re: GSWeb/GDL2 Status, (continued)
- Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Manuel Guesdon, 2007/11/23
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Helge Hess, 2007/11/18
- Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Manuel Guesdon, 2007/11/23
- Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Thom Cherryhomes, 2007/11/23
- Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, David Chisnall, 2007/11/23
- Re[4]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Manuel Guesdon, 2007/11/23
- Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard,
Helge Hess <=
- Re: Re[2]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, David Chisnall, 2007/11/24
- Re[4]: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Manuel Guesdon, 2007/11/23
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Fred Kiefer, 2007/11/10
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Stefan Bidigaray, 2007/11/10
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2007/11/10
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Aria Stewart, 2007/11/10
- Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Stefan Bidigaray, 2007/11/10
Re: Objective-C 2.0 and other new features in Leopard, Gregory John Casamento, 2007/11/10