On Thursday, June 28, 2007, at 03:13PM, "Tim Jones" <email@hidden> wrote:
>Okay, even though I swore that I wouldn't add fuel to this fire, I'm
>totally confused as to the level of confusion that I'm reading
>(discounting the C/C++ vs. ObjC arguments). From what I see, Carbon
>isn't going away, it's just not getting the full 64 bit monty. How
>does that affect my Carbon UI development? It doesn't unless I need
>to display a 2TB+ image in a window, or display 2TB+ of cell contents
>simultaneously in a table (yeh, right). So my confusion is that I
>don't understand how not having a 64 bit UI API will really affect
>Carbon users. If I've got a huge data model that requires 64 bit
>value handling, I don't need to use Carbon UI functions, so I'm not
>limited by Carbon's lack of 64 bit underpinnings. Is not having a
>"UI is 64 bit" checkbox on product datasheets that big of a deal for
>customers' perception of a product?
I think there are multiple concerns with this no 64-bit Carbon info:
1. It was announced last year and then no news this year at WWDC other than we were told that it is/will be pulled in future Leopard's.
2. There's no formal definition of Carbon, so we have no idea which part will not go 64-bit (MacWindows.h, CarbonEvents.h, Menus.h, Pasteboard.h, Files.h, etc.)
3. No 64-bit Carbon is being viewed as no future for Carbon
4. Cross-platform libraries seems to use Carbon a lot and no 64-bit support could mean their libraries won't work (or won't work as is) in the future.
Others include the choice of programming languages (C/C++ over Objective-C or any language that has less than 20 volumes of books in one bookstore) and existing programming API knowledge.
pete
_______________________________________________
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
