Re: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
Re: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
- Subject: Re: ObjC API != Cocoa (Re: Another controversial question)
- From: Chris Kane <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:47:05 -0700
We simply can't talk about that. Not only do plans and schedules change
(then anger: "Apple promised us _______!"), but some groups might want
to make a splash with an announcement of "now with Cocoa-like APIs", or
whatever. Or conversely, if we say we're not going to do something,
then decide to do it, then somebody might also be upset.
Chris Kane
Cocoa Frameworks, Apple
On Tuesday, September 4, 2001, at 08:30 AM, Jonathan Hendry wrote:
On Tuesday, September 4, 2001, at 12:52 , Chris Kane wrote:
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.
It might be helpful if outsiders knew where ObjC API were likely to
appear, and perhaps an idea of their scope, and areas where Apple
is unlikely to provide much of an Objective-C API.
Unrealistic, I suppose, but I think people won't want to develop
their own Objective-C kits atop the procedural interfaces if
they think Apple will ship something similar.
(This mostly goes for MiscKit-type open projects, rather than
internal code.)