Re: Cocoa from C++ (dont want to mix it)
Re: Cocoa from C++ (dont want to mix it)
- Subject: Re: Cocoa from C++ (dont want to mix it)
- From: Gen Kiyooka <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 00:46:40 -0700
One particular aspect of Obj-C brouhaha which is largely ignored is
that under OSX the
Windowing system is implemented on top of a true object-oriented
language with
a bona-fide class framework, and that design decision accrues toward
both Apple's
ability to rapidly build bundled (in-house) applications, and to 3rd
party developers; through
both the Obj-C Cocoa interface and all the other OOP bindings that have
been added
on to the Cocoa libraries, including java and bbum's Python bindings.
The key is that the
design, the hierarchy and the relationships are well-thought-out,
stable and encapsulated,
which is what the promise of OOP was all about, wasn't it: re-use.
Regardless as to whether or not Objective-C is popular, the fact that
the Windowing
system and GUI toolkit are built on top of a well-designed and stable
OOP class library is
a prime benefit in itself.
Most other "platforms" that I can think of are either trying to play
'catch-up' in this regard,
or have written C++ 'wrapper frameworks' which attempt to object-ize
the native windowing
system, which are generally opaque and object-based (a la MODULA-2)
rather than object-oriented.
Carbon, an Apple provided alternative choice, lies more along the lines
of this model. Carbon is just
as accessible to C++ programmers as the Win32 API.
It's great that C++ has risen to popularity so quickly. I use it
extensively in my own work. But if
we're going to measure languages by popularity, we ought to wait at
least until Objective-C
is as old as LISP is now (50-ish).
Just because something is popular and makes money doesn't mean it will
stand the
test of time or that it is inherently worth using. Nor can you tell
how a decision is going
to play out by evaluating it solely by its success in the past or
present moment.
Gen
On Apr 13, 2005, at 9:38 PM, email@hidden wrote:
On Apr 13, 2005, at 2:38 PM, Lemings, Eric B wrote:
These are all quite reasonable
responses but my point still remains: Objective-C will never be a
mainstream language like C or C++ and the Mac will suffer for it.
This always amuses me. Objective-C isn't as popular as C or C++, but
to call it a niche language is to simply demonstrate one's lack of
familiarity with the industry. It is available on pretty much every
target architecture/platform of GCC and some that don't.
Objective-C is used relatively widely on Linux and not just for
GNUStep. The language is also used in many academic and other
research endeavors. GNOME has long had Objective-C bindings. KDE
does too, but not nearly as well supported.
Objective-C has a long and rich history across many platforms and
environments. While Apple is certainly the most prominent commercial
user of Objective-C, there is a diverse and vibrant community of
Objective-C developers across many
platforms/architectures/environments.
b.bum _______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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