Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
- Subject: Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
- From: Lloyd Dupont <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 09:21:21 +1000
Why don't you inherit from NSObject? Easier all around...
Not portable. My ObjC code currently runs on NeXT, FreeBSD, linux,
Solaris and even windoze(w/cygnus). I would need a much more
compelling
reason to inherit from a repackaged root class than to pick up on
these 2.
I do protest, GNUstep implement NSObject as well ! as does NeXTSTeP 3.3
! (or 4.3, my memory is not what it used to be :-)
and the retain/release mechanism is a very usefull addition !
Object doesn't respond to these methods, but the similar:
- (BOOL) respondsTo:(SEL)aSelector;
- (IMP) methodFor:(SEL)aSelector;
I know. That's why I said that I added a category that reimplements
the NSObject
versions by calling these 2.
My question was more "why were these reimplemented in NSObject" ?
In fact, while I'm at it, why is there an NSObject ?
because of this new memory policy (retai/release), and some other thing
and to let all code wrok erfectly without being perturbated by these
breaking change in the root object ....
_______________________________________________
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.