Re: CF Portability
Re: CF Portability
- Subject: Re: CF Portability
- From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:58:04 +0100
On Tuesday, December 31, 2002, at 12:19 Uhr, Rosyna wrote:
Last I checked, GNUStep wasn't a viable option for windows.
This turns out not to be the case. I have recently ported my 50KLOC+
of frameworks to Windows using GNUstep/MinGW for a customer.
Mainly do to installation issues
On the developer side, there is an excellent set of instructions for
building GNUstep with MinGW included with the GNUstep makefile package.
There are some issues to contend with, but hey, this is Windows we're
talking about! You are right that installation + Makefile creation are
the most difficult parts to deal with. The code pretty much compiles
"as is".
On the user side, there is nothing additional to install, the DLLs and
Resources can be put inside your app's directory.
and lack of API completeness.
Both libFoundation and gnustep-base, which are what CoreFoundation
compares to, are feature-complete, obvious Apple-only extensions such
as AppleScript support notwithstanding.
AppKit also seems to be reasonable by now, at least the GNUstep mailing
list has reports of people other than the original developers running
GNUstep apps on Windows machines.
CoreFoundation *does* work on Windows.
The latest build does not, according to Apple employees.
If you ask around,
If I "ask around"?!?
I am sure you can find an old version of a compiled CoreFoundation
library that works well on windows.
That sounds like an excellent portability strategy: rely on finding
older compiled versions of a library. Use a library that is created
and supported by a vendor whose economic interests run counter to
actually providing Windows compatibility. Simply "assume" that said
vendor will provide such compatibility in the future against its own
economic interest, and without any statement whatsoever from said
vendor that compatibility is even a goal. Assume this despite the fact
that the library in question has recently moved from being Windows
compatble to not being Windows compatible. Do not be deterred by the
fact that said vendor has, in the past, *removed* Windows compatibility
from products that were Windows compatible despite *written promises*
of *continued* support for Windows.
As I said, this sounds like an excellent portability strategy.
I need a couple of million dollars of venture capital for an on-line
pet-food business, can you help me? ;-)
(I don't have such a lib). Not sure if the Notifications
(CFUserNotifications or CFNotifications) work on windows though.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Marcel
Ack, at 12/31/02, Marcel Weiher said:
Objective-C/Foundation code is much more portable than
CoreFoundation, because OpenSource implementations of Foundation are
available (GNUstep base and libFoundation). Use of CoreFoundation is
largely non-portable because large parts of CoreFoundation are not
OpenSource (only parts are in Darwin).
So if you want to be portable: use Foundaton, avoid CoreFoundation.
--
--
Marcel Weiher Metaobject Software Technologies
email@hidden www.metaobject.com
Metaprogramming for the Graphic Arts. HOM, IDEAs, MetaAd etc.
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.