discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Which ObjC2.0 features are missing in the latest GCC?


From: Maxthon Chan
Subject: Re: Which ObjC2.0 features are missing in the latest GCC?
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:31:16 +0800

If we have Swift interworking we can also do the inverse: support Apple’s Swift 
compiler with our own C and Objective-C based libobjc2, CoreFoundation and 
Foundation packages. This way instead of throwing out chunks of the code we 
have to extend and adapt them to fit the Swift compiler. This will require us 
submit some patches to Apple though to enable building of the macOS Swift 
interworking code on the Linux version.

> On Nov 24, 2019, at 9:25 PM, Fred Kiefer <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> Am 24.11.2019 um 10:11 schrieb Max Chan <address@hidden>:
>> 
>> I would like to add another plus for dropping GCC: if we want any hope for 
>> Swift interworking, we have to use clang as the compiler.
>> 
>> Apple have no plan to provide any GUI support on Linux version of Swift. If 
>> we have Swift interworking, even though we may have to drop our own libobjc, 
>> Foundation and CoreFoundation in favor of Apple’s release, the GNUStep GUI 
>> package can provide the replacement AppKit that Apple’s Swift release lacked.
> 
> This is an interesting plan, but one not shared by many GNUstep developers. 
> For me it is fine if you set up a Foundation replacement that is based on 
> Apples CoreFoundation code and I am even willing to help you to get GNUstep 
> gui working with this setup, but I would never contribute myself to this 
> development and don’t see it as part of GNUstep. You see, GNUstep as a 
> community is a very broad concept. Some of us are willing to work on a 
> desktop environment others are into obscure hardware support. But the base of 
> GNUstep are the libraries that allow writing or porting ObjC applications in 
> a completely free environment. The direction you are heading for is in my 
> view outside of that scope.
> 
> 




reply via email to

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