Mailing Lists: Apple Mailing Lists
 Image of Mac OS face in stamp
Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right?


On Apr 4, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Marcel Weiher wrote:


On 3 Apr 2005, at 23:47, Dietmar Planitzer wrote:


On Apr 3, 2005, at 11:55 PM, James B. Tuley wrote:


I think Marcel's point is that being a strict superset of C which is useful in OS X when most of your libraries are C and very singular, if you get rid of that aspect, how is it different from SmallTalk? I think the likely answer to that is it would be a similar language that is not quite as good.

Yes, but with an important difference to Smalltalk: it still allows me to compile and use my already existing ObjC code with only moderate or no changes.

No difference there. Nobody is going to take your Objective-C compiler away from you, and it will continue to work just as you expect. Whereas your changes would be fairly dramatic changes to Objective-C...

Wow, you seem to know more about what I had in mind regarding ObjC, AGC and semantic changes to object pointers, then I do. So I can assume that you are able to answer the following question: Would an ObjC with AGC allow a cast of a char* to an id or not ?

I think you can not answer this question because we never talked about such concrete language design details. However, this would have been a requirement before we could determine whether the introduction of an AGC would be a dramatic change to the language in the sense that it would break existing source code or not.

My original post was about RC and AGC in general. I pointed out that RC has its problems and I also pointed out some advantages and disadvantages of AGC.

A couple of posts later we've ended up were we always end up, when someone suggests that something maybe could be added/removed/improved to/from/in ObjC: the usual meta discussion about what the definition of ObjC is and that every little addition to it suddenly turns it into Smalltalk.

Great, we've heard this stuff often enough. Its not necessary to repeat it over and over again. I personally, neither care about the definition of ObjC nor about Smalltalk. I do care about an ObjC that is able to grow with my needs.


Regards,

Dietmar Planitzer

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Objc-language mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden







References: 


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: Dietmar Planitzer <email@hidden>)


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: Dietmar Planitzer <email@hidden>)


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: "James B. Tuley" <email@hidden>)


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: Dietmar Planitzer <email@hidden>)


 >Re: AGC was: Re: inner classes not possible,(in objc) right? (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)























Visit the Apple Store online or at retail locations.

1-800-MY-APPLE


Contact Apple | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy


Copyright © 2011 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.