Re: When did forward method references become legal?
Re: When did forward method references become legal?
- Subject: Re: When did forward method references become legal?
- From: Sean McBride <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:01:11 -0500
- Organization: Rogue Research Inc.
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 07:46:39 -0800, Matt Neuburg said:
>>> @implementation Foo
>>> - (void) first { [self second]; } // <—no longer a compile error
>>> - (void) second { }
>>>
>>> I’m using Xcode 4.3; anyone know what version this was added in? I
>>> didn’t see anything relevant in the very cursory Xcode release notes or
>>> what’s-new document, and I couldn’t find any Clang release notes.
>>
>> Isn't it annoying that the very language changes in this way, without
>(hardly) any notice?!?!
>
>I just read a message on the dev forums complaining that in a project
>with multiple developers, those using 4.3 are writing code that those
>using 4.2 can't compile... Of course one could reply "So don't do
>that" (i.e., develop using different versions of Xcode), but still, some
>formal warning of this change would have been useful.
>
>Not to mention what it does to those of us in the last stages of trying
>to ship a book about this whole thing... :) m.
It's very annoying for anyone developing library code too.
Ironic that Xcode has settings for C and C++ dialects, ie:
GCC_C_LANGUAGE_STANDARD = c99
CLANG_CXX_LANGUAGE_STANDARD = c++0x
but no dialect setting for the platform's primary language!
Do you need forward declarations? Is the 'atomic' keyword present? Can you use C++11-style enums? @synthesize by default? Who knows! :(
--
____________________________________________________________
Sean McBride, B. Eng email@hidden
Rogue Research www.rogue-research.com
Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden