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 11:28:38 +1000
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 !
I believe that NSObject was introduced with the OpenStep product where
the last release was 4.2. NeXTStep
sports Object ALONE as the root much in the form that still lives on
in the Gnu runtime. Ah yea, retain/release,
maybe I'll get around to checking those out sometime. Still really
haven't found the need as I'm old school and
fairly adept at memory management.
you should, take just a little while to read about, a few days to
become confident with and.. it's so much easier.
I remember (now) I used to (long ago) programs on NeXT 3.3, then the
version 4.0 was released, well I was a bit lost at the begin,but later
on I found the change (mainly the retain/release mechanism, as far I
remember) so much better.
And if you like total memory control, no worry, it's NOT a concurrent
garbage collection mechanism, you DO have full control, it's just an
easy policy :-)
Ummm, O.K. but back to my original Q, what was wrong with Object's
methodFor: and respondsTo: . Why create 2 new
methods, methodForSelector: and respondsToSelector:, that do EXACTLY
the same thing in NSObject ? Is it for
namespace clashes ? Is anyone likely to use both the Object and
NSObject class in the same App ?
well, now I'm working with an apple, I have no NeXT at hand, so ...
anyway:
1st: maybe they add a few functionality while overriding ?
2nd: it seems, (I'm a bit puzzled) that NSObject doesn't currently
inherit from Object (according to current header), I though it should
be implicit, but they even redefined the 'isa' member ...
3rd: in NSObject it's methodForSelector: & respondsToSelector: while in
Object it is methodFor: & respondsTo:, so, strictly speaking it's not
really the same method.
However I won't be surprised if internally they simply call to the
parent Object version.
why such a change ?
would I be an OPeNSTeP engineer whose boss I said 'we will make a new
object ! a cleaner object', well I will do just that ...
_______________________________________________
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.