On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 09:49:23 +1100, Graham Cox said: >> Could be. But Apple could have provided a NSPersistentDocument2 class >that people could opt into. But they haven't. > >Have you noticed that they never do this though? It must be some sort of >policy because there are numerous examples where a fork would seem to >make more sense than adding more and more features to a class. >NSTableView comes to mind among others.
Sorta... I mean, they'd never use a stupid name like NSPersistentDocument2. But it's not so different from entirely deprecating NSMovieView and calling it QTMovieView. They sometimes do something else, like a big fat mode switch like NSDateFormatterBehavior10_4. Cheers, -- ____________________________________________________________ Sean McBride, B. Eng s...@rogue-research.com Rogue Research www.rogue-research.com Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
