[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Emacs 23 Mac port

From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
Subject: Re: Emacs 23 Mac port
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:44:21 +0900
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (Shij┼Ź) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

>>>>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:11:01 -0600, Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> said:

YM> If you mean Emacs 23 Mac port, see the following message in
YM> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00148.html

> So are you saying Carbon *is* a good long-term solution?

> Or are you saying it's supported right now and that's good enough?

I mean what's currently supported in 64-bit Carbon is expected to
survive for a certain period of time, because Apple has already made
drastic cut for Carbon on the 64-bit transition.  Of course, I can't
speak for Apple.

> Carbon was not supposed to get a 64-bit upgrade when we first
> discussed your Mac port IIRC; obviously it has one now.

Typical misunderstanding about 64-bit Carbon.  It was the GUI portion
of HIToolbox that was not supposed to get a 64-bit upgrade from the
beginning.  Not the whole Carbon.  That's why I ported only the GUI
part from Carbon HIToolbox to Cocoa AppKit.

By the way, which is in your mind when you speak "Carbon", C APIs in
general or the Carbon framework (i.e.,
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/)?  The latter does not
include Core Foundation, Core Graphics, Core Text, or Image I/O, all
of which are C APIs supported and legitimate even in iOS.

> I think the Emacs maintainers still prefer the NS port because of
> the GNUStep support.

As I'm saying in the beginning of README-mac file in the Mac port, if
the NS port is good enough for you, then you don't need to try the Mac

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu

reply via email to

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