Re: Cappuccino
Re: Cappuccino
- Subject: Re: Cappuccino
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 15:54:09 -0700
On Sep 5, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Alan Ward wrote:
On Sep 5, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Sep 5, 2008, at 1:52 PM, Florijan Stamenkovic wrote:
Uhm, I've taken a peek at the API. Seems to have some interesting
stuff in there. Very AppKit like. I wonder what Apple would have
to say about that, legally. Still, 117 classes to cover everything
from basic raw type encapsulation to high level GUI management???
Sounds weak and I have doubts about how extendable the low level
API is, and how easy it would be to integrate custom stuff into
it. Which is crucial for library development... Which is crucial
for a language... Which is, well, just crucial.
I wondered about that when I saw:
280 North formed earlier this year when three friends from USC got
together to realize their dream of working together to develop
software. Francisco Tolmasky and Ross Boucher graduated from USC
in 2006 and 2007 respectively
It takes a while to get a sense of good API design.
Ross is no slouch though.
Not saying he is. Just that the lack of real world experience (does
Apple count as real world? :-P) gave me pause. On the other hand, you
could point to the Java API that was designed by professionals with
many years of experience, so that does not guarantee a good API either.
He worked for Apple for a while and quit to go do 280 North.
IME working for Apple is not a rock solid guarantee of competence or
skill. I am not at all sure what quitting Apple means... ;-)
Chuck
Well, we'll see...
Yes.
Chuck
As for the replacement of JavaClient? Hm, I'd say it'd be more
suited to a JSON-RPC style solution. Dave has a point in pointing
out EOF libraries on the client. I would not count on Apple
implementing those in Cappuccino...
F
On Sep 05, 2008, at 16:04, Guido Neitzer wrote:
On 05.09.08 13:43, "Chuck Hill" <email@hidden> wrote:
That is fine for document centric apps. My uneducated, uninformed
guess is that using this to replace JavaClient would be a lot of
work. It might be interesting to try.
I know. I guess, you can provide some sort of JSON data source
and use that
in the way you had to when there was no CoreData - populate
arrays and so
on.
Yeah, there should be something for that. Might be coming pretty
soon ...
The framework itself looks really cool.
cug
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-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.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden