• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: ADC Core Data article
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ADC Core Data article


  • Subject: Re: ADC Core Data article
  • From: アンドレ(Andre) <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 16:03:53 -0700


On 平成 17/04/09, at 15:16, Marcel Weiher wrote:


On 9 Apr 2005, at 18:08, アンドレ(Andre) wrote:

Of course, there is *one* very specific benefit to this:  lock-in.  "Thou shalt have no frameworks beside me!"  Lock-in into a framework that is Apple proprietary, eschewing the mechanisms already provided in the open-source language that its built on in favor of an Apple-patented mechanism.  Yes, KVC is patented, though I can't for the life of me figure out how they got that one through the check for prior art.  Or considering the prior art, through the check for non-obviousness.  Har har...
Wow.

[Note here:  the har har is aimed at the broken state of the world's patent systems, the european patent office seems to be even worse than the US, though that may seem impossible...]

Oh, and with *completely* proprietary datastores!  So if you base your persistent store on CoreData, your file-format is owned by Apple.  Cool!  I think I'll pass.
I think thats the whole point isn't it?
Besides is XML and  SQLite formats aren't exactly proprietary is it?

An important thing to note about all of these formats: Core Data may change the way that it uses them at any time. While it is easy enough to look under the covers and see what is going on with the XML and SQLite data formats, you should never modify the data in these files yourself.

Take home message:  CoreData controls how things are stored in those XML/SQLite files, and this may change at any time.  So you don't own your data format, if you use CoreData persistence.
OK, but I think the reason is not some kind of lock-in conspiracy and more to do with high level abstraction.
IOW, implementation details are something we shouldn't ..necessarily have to deal with because they may radically change in the future, and as long
as we don't depend too much on it, then we get all the enhancements for free.

This also makes it much easier to learn and use. IMHO.

I really don't mind as long as the DTD/schema is available to parse it. And there is always XSLT.

Besides, when archiving with NSCoding, are you already not saving to an "Apple format," the Property List?

Nope.  NSCoding is a protocol, it will work with any style archiver/unarchiver you choose to implement.  For example, I use my own MPWXmlCoder, which works just fine with both Apple internal and my own classes via NSCoding.  It also works fine under GNUStep...
OK, NSCoder is what I meant.

Marcel



 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

References: 
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: Will Mason <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: Paul Szego <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: Paul Szego <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: アンドレ(Andre) <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ADC Core Data article (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: ADC Core Data article
  • Next by Date: Re: deactivating an NSScrollView
  • Previous by thread: Re: ADC Core Data article
  • Next by thread: Re: ADC Core Data article
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread