|
From: | Stéphane Corthésy |
Subject: | Re: Cocotron used for a real-world app |
Date: | Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:48:00 +0100 |
I did during some months, as well as I played with GNUstep on OSX some years ago.
One of the points no one talked about is the easiness with which you can distribute a Windows app built with Cocotron: you zip the .app folder, copy and unzip it on another Windows machine and here you are: no need to install anything else: no library, no service, no registry modification! Maybe I'm wrong, as I haven't worked with GNUstep since years, but IIRC for a GNUstep app to work on Windows, you need to install several DLLs and their related resource files, and need to install some services (for DO, etc.). With Cocotron, your app is self- contained, like Mac apps. There is a minor drawback, of course: the Cocotron frameworks (Foundation & AppKit) are copied in the .app folder, thus making your binary a little bigger than expected, but this is really a very minor drawback nowadays. And there's no DO, but how many apps do need it?
About development, some people seem concerned about the need to compile every time for Windows AND Mac, thus slowing down development. It's not true: you build only the target you want to: Windows OR Mac. You get two separate .app folders. For debugging the Windows target, you can even remote-debug it through Xcode: you install the Windows app on the Windows computer/VM, then start debug it from within Xcode. I admit that in its current state, this solution is not yet satisfying, as the custom gdb is still in experimental state, but as you would say to defend GNUstep: it's just a matter of modifying some C code, just a matter of time ;-)
I agree that GNUstep maturity is better that Cocotron, but the Cocotron experience on Windows is much better than what you want to agree with; it should help you to make GNUstep better on Windows, not only in term of API, but also in term of user experience.
Cheers, Stéphane
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |