• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)


  • Subject: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
  • From: Chris Kane <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:52:46 -0700

On Monday, September 3, 2001, at 09:56 AM, <<somebody>> wrote:
[...] the OpenStep API
generally (save an unusually small number of exceptions which prove the
rule) makes truly *A LOT* more sense than other APIs do [...]

Therefore there is so much ranting when some API (like authentification
instead NIAccess, QuickTime instead /never really completed/ NeXTTIME, etc)
is excluded from Cocoa: that's like you was used to powered tools, and now
somebody took them from you, saying the plain old hand saw, screwdriver and
hammer can be used to do the job.

[Not meant to be directed to any persons in particular...]

One thing to keep in mind is that Cocoa corresponds mostly to what was in OpenStep. NeXT had many bits of ObjC API that weren't part of OpenStep, and aren't part of Cocoa today. (EOF is another example, which was probably omitted from above to avoid restarting the usual flame fest.) Many/most groups at NeXT produced an ObjC API for their bit of software, software not managed by the AppKit/Foundation group(s). If those same groups (where they still exist) still wanted to produce those same bits of software (and it was going to be part of the product) with an ObjC API, they probably could (that is, ObjC is still around).

It [Cocoa != ObjC API] probably gets fuzzy here when the main big ObjC API left is only Cocoa; then, people begin to equate them.

In many cases those folks have "turned over", and new groups have been told to produce something developers can use. When Carbon and Cocoa developers are your audience, the common factor is C. These new groups could also use ObjC (and may be), but it's simpler to produce one API rather than N different forms of it (I very much wonder if there'd be bits of Foundation available from Java if I didn't have to), particularly when pressed for time. But IB's API is still an ObjC one, and if you're writing a system pref panel or screen saver you use ObjC. There's an ObjC API to OpenGL. More may follow in time.



Chris Kane
Cocoa Frameworks, Apple


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
      • From: Jonathan Hendry <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: NSImage initWithContentsOfURL:
  • Next by Date: Re: Any advantages of Unix formatting
  • Previous by thread: Re: NSImage initWithContentsOfURL:
  • Next by thread: Re: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread