On Mar 7, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Sean McBride wrote:
> I wish Obj-C had an ISO standard. It seems the language is a moving target, constantly being redefined as llvm changes. Or if not a standard, how about at least version numbers? We're clearly past "Objective-C 2" but there seems to be no organized list of language changes since, and which version of Xcode/clang supports them.)
I know that this wasn't the main thrust of your email, but it is worth addressing directly: We've had internal discussions and have explicitly decided *not* to version the language any more. Instead of "Objective-C 2.0" or some such, there is now just "Objective-C as of Xcode 4.4" or "Objective-C in LLVM Compiler/Clang 4.0".
If you'd like to reason about or conditionalize your code on various language features, please use the Clang feature checking macros:
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#feature_check
For some Objective-C examples:
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#objc_features
A tangential thing I'd like to point out is that the Objective-C literals features that went out with the Mountain Lion beta tools are now in the LLVM.org repository. We are still finalizing the documentation for them though.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
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
