Re: Future Objective-C changes
Re: Future Objective-C changes
- Subject: Re: Future Objective-C changes
- From: Andrew Duncan <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 01:08:18 +1200
At 8:06 AM -0400 16/05/2003, Greg Weston wrote:
>
On Friday, May 16, 2003, at 03:13 AM, Jeff Disher wrote:
>
>
> Why does everyone insist on polluting the Objective-C language so much?
>
> ...
>
> The problem is that people want Obj-C to be C++.
>
>
First, please note that it's not "everyone" that wants to do things
>
like this; it's a relative minority. And you started to work toward the
>
answer yourself: familiarity. You've got a fairly large population
>
rapidly being exposed to something new. Some of them are going to miss
>
things that they've become used to elsewhere, not always taking the
>
time to see whether the thing they missed actually adds value in the
>
new context. It's happened every time I've seen or been part of a mass
>
immigration like what we're experiencing now.
>
Exactly. I keep reminding myself that Obj-C is much more like Smalltalk
than C++.
It's confusing that, on it's face, Obj-C looks like C, which invites
comparison with C++, which invites lots of debate.
I guess you have to mutter "Smalltalk, Dynamic Runtime, Smalltalk..." under
your breath for while. It worked for me :-)
I'm just grateful that Obj-C gives me the dynamic model of Smalltalk with
the familiar syntax of C.
Cheers,
--
Andrew Duncan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
voice: +64 9 623 2926
mobile: 021 297 3174
web:
http://web.webwerks.co.nz/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Programmers do it while (1)
_______________________________________________
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.