• 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: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa


  • Subject: Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
  • From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:13:19 +0100


On 23 Apr 2005, at 21:29, Ondra Cada wrote:
On 23.4.2005, at 20:15, Rick Kitts wrote:

... XCode is, in my estimation, bronze age largely because it appears to not assist in agile methods. In particular it doesn't well embrace refactoring.

Definitely. The reason is also well-known: it's since that what you Java folk understand under the name is plain impossible for Cocoa/ObjC/meta-programming based development.

Sorry Ondra, that is simply not true. Refactoring (and especially the Refactoring Browser) come from Smalltalk, and I hope you're not going to try and argue that Smalltalk has a less powerful meta-programming facility than Objective-C?


[snip]



- target / action paradigm: try to change an action method of class A without changing the same action method of class B, and then fix all the NIBs accordingly :)
- First Responder stuff (remember? Any object can send any message to the responder chain -- without a clue which instance of which class happens to be the one who gets it at the moment)
- categories, poseAsClassing, message forwarding: are you quite aware that it is pretty common that a class which does not implement xxx, and none of whose superclasses implements xxx, actualy *does respond to* xxx?
- KVC/KVO/bindings: pray tell me, how do you want to change a method name of one class so as the KVC/bindings, where the method happens to be called by name, which name happens to be stored in somewhere (might be a NIB, might be a model, might be a plist, might be anything) works appropriately?

Actually, I would say that it KVC/KVO/bindings are the culprit here, by encoding important structural information ("code" by any other name) in unchecked, usually string-based data structures.


And more and more, there's Core Data, which probably exploit similar techniques, there's HOM -- agreeably not a standard part of Cocoa, but, far as I can say, pretty often used (and *should* be used even more often -- heck, in my personal opinion Apple should embrace HOM into Foundation!), and more.

The trick is, with those "re-factoring" tools you break reflection in your plain Java, but you rightfully don't care, for reflection is hardly ever used. The extreme power of Cocoa though is based *especially* on (an ObjC rough equivalent of) reflection.

I don't really see your point here. Certainly something like HOM is largely transparent to refactorings (maybe apart from the __ trick it needs for another couple of days...)


From other comments on the list it is evident that folks unexposed to refactoring with an intelligent editor (i.e. non-Java coders) don't grok the value of this

Quite the contrary: we who use a decent API which massively exploits the charm of meta-programming based on (a rough equivalent of) reflection know quite well that (a) re-factoring (alas) cannot be automated (that is, not this way, there may be a different one I don't know of), (b) the advantages are *definitely* worth to.

Once again: Smalltalkers who use the Refactoring Browser AND use meta-programming are going to disagree with you rather vehemently.


[snip]

Cheers,

Marcel


-- Marcel Weiher Metaobject Software Technologies email@hidden www.metaobject.com The simplicity of power HOM, IDEAs, MetaAd etc. 1d480c25f397c4786386135f8e8938e4


_______________________________________________ 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
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
      • From: Ondra Cada <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: "Zacharias J. Beckman" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: Rick Kitts <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: John Stiles <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: "Zacharias J. Beckman" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: Rick Kitts <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa (From: Ondra Cada <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
  • Next by Date: Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
  • Previous by thread: Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
  • Next by thread: Re: Java vs. Objective-C for Cocoa
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread