Re: Volume Tracking in Cocoa without Carbon?
Re: Volume Tracking in Cocoa without Carbon?
- Subject: Re: Volume Tracking in Cocoa without Carbon?
- From: Deirdre Saoirse Moen <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 17:13:35 -0700
> From: Deirdre Saoirse Moen <email@hidden>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:09:41 -0700
The problem is that the paradigm you're looking for isn't there: it's
simply not the same beast.
After perusing this list for a few days, I've seen the same issue over and
over: is it a Mac, or a *nix box? It seems to me that:
1. If you want file behavior like a *nix box, use Cocoa as-is.
2. If you want file behavior like a circa-2000 Mac, use Cocoa with a
sprinkling of Carbon to smooth over the rough spots.
My question is: why not use a little Carbon to get at the old Mac behaviors?
Is there a performance penalty? Does the app get bigger? Or is it just a
pain in the arse?
Think of Carbon as legacy glue, similar to, oh, self-modifying code
(I remember when TN 119 or so came out railing against it for
compatibility), 68K code fragments in assembler, and all the other
fun stuff we've had to do away with over the years, like MFS (as in
pre-HFS).
Do you want to tie your app to the past or to the future?
Since falling in love with Rhapsody DR2, I've taken a three-year
detour in Unix, in part for preparation for MacOS X. This has
involved being a sysadmin at Honda, a webmaster & developer for
Nissan, and a coder for places like Linuxcare and TiVo.
Yes, there is pain initially. It does go away.
--
_Deirdre Stash-o-Matic:
http://weirdre.com http://deirdre.net
Macintosh Developer (seeking work): Will work for Cocoa
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by."
- Douglas Adams