[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Q's about GNUstep (-make & -base)

From: Richard Frith-Macdonald
Subject: Re: Q's about GNUstep (-make & -base)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:30:31 +0100

On 11 Jun 2008, at 16:12, Michael Hopkins rm-this wrote:

Hi all

A couple of questions:

1) Can I use gnustep-make on Linux with colormake or clmake to colourise the output during builds? If so, how? Have googled and looked through the docs but I can find but no hints there. I suspect it would just be changing 'make' -> 'clmake' somewhere in the bowels of the GNUstep directory hierarchy. Also, how to I set the default level of warnings (i.e. turn off those annoying "warning: multi-line comment").

I'm afraid I don't know colormake and am not familiar with that warning, so I can't help on this one.

2) A more general question about code quality and portability of gnustep-base. I am just embarking on a project to port a bunch of Obj-C/Cocoa code from Mac 10.5 to GNUstep on amd64 Linux (Debian/ Ubuntu) and Win32 (with MSYS/MingW etc) using appropriate GNstep makefiles. No GUI, just using Foundation classes.

Going very well so far, except for some classes differing between Cocoa Foundation & gnustep-base (btw, is there a document listing the differences anywhere?),

I don't think so ... but basically base is missing applescript support classes and many OSX10.5 features. We want contributions to bring it from basically 10.4 compatibility to 10.5 compatibility.

but I am wondering about things like:

- is libgnustep-base (& libobjc) maintained now & into the future? On both linux
  and Win32?


- is it of an overall quality to be trusted for enterprise use

Yes... and has been used in the that context for several years.

and if not where
  are the glitches at the moment?

- is it likely in the near future (or ever) that Objective-C 2.0 language support will be provided? Mainly interested in the syntax changes like @properties, @synthesize, fast enumeration (which I suspect gcc 4.3 will mainly support)
  rather than garbage collection which I am unlikely to use.

AFAIK, while some people have expressed an interest in part of it, nobody is working on that ... but I'm not sure. i don't think many people like the syntax changes, so I guess we are more likely to see more popular/useful features (like non-fragile instance variables) in the near future.

reply via email to

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