Re: Keyed Archiving and MOSX compatibility...

[Fred Kiefer]

Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> I believe that the current effort to make keyed archiving might cause massive
> changes in the way .gorm's are loaded, particularly with internals of certain
> classes as well as the custom class templates.
>
> While, I believe our template system is similar, it is not the same as the one
> on MOSX and it is, in some ways, better.   We need to make certain that these
> classes are minimally impacted by this change.

Could you explain a bit, what the principle difference between the two is?

> My intent when I suggested that we implement keyed archiving was to be able to
> get XML output for .gorm files, whether that was MOSX compatible or not.
>
> I beleive it is well worth the effort to try to make GNUstep and MOSX
> compatible in this way, but I also believe that we shouldn't massively impact
> current functionality to make it happen.

I would also like to see this happen. My feeling is that an XML format 
is only worthwhile, when it is compatible to MacOSX. The only other 
useful attempt would be to to get the Renaissance format working :-)