On 3/1/05 4:31 AM, Kurt Bigler didst favor us with:
> on 2/28/05 12:48 AM, Takehiko Abe <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Kurt Bigler wrote:
>>> But what I think you're saying is that I shouldn't expect this to be
>>> available under CFM.
>>
>> It is available.
>
>
> on 2/28/05 1:21 AM, Bryan Pietrzak <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Depends on what CFM bridge libraries you use.... not all of the mach-o
>> APIs available via the Mac OS X frameworks are available via the CFM
>> bridge libraries.
>
>
> So I guess the header information doesn't distinguish what things from
> Carbon.framework are available in CarbonFrameworkLib (and etc. for other
> frameworks with bridges). Perhaps the intention is that everything will
> eventually make it in the bridge library, so it is not worth documenting
> what isn't there because that just means it hasn't made it yet?
I think it's more that they intend for everyone to eventually move to
Mach-O. The only reasons to stay with CFM revolve around compatibility, and
the more time goes on the less need there will be for that.
Larry
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Carbon-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/carbon-dev/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
