Re: osX86 and frameworks
Re: osX86 and frameworks
- Subject: Re: osX86 and frameworks
- From: glenn andreas <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 09:01:26 -0700
On Jun 7, 2005, at 8:36 AM, email@hidden wrote:
While something like Rosetta is likely just as much work to pull
off, bundles have already provided the bits needed to pull off this
transition for years, and could be expanded to other arches in the
future with ease.
Not to downplay the power of bundles (especially for things like
localization), the "universal binary" is all part of the underlying
mach-o executable format. "The file format formerly know as fat" is
all about being a container for multiple architectures (and currently
is used to provide support for ppc64 and regular 32 bit code in a
single executable). This is important because it allow things that
aren't in bundles (like command line tools) to be universal as
well... (and to try to bring this back to Cocoa, you can have
foundation based command line tools that are universal).
_______________________________________________
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