On 14 Mar 2013, at 20:19, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <lars.sonchocky-helld...@hamburg.de> wrote:
> > Am 14.03.2013 um 09:42 schrieb Fred Kiefer: > >> Having decided that I googled once more and found this article: >> http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2010-01-22-toll-free-bridging-internals.html > > Interesting find in a comment there: > > http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2010-01-22-toll-free-bridging-internals.html#comment-84b004a6a9b2e8b3a5fdec10f73b2393 > > "If you look at the Darwin sources, you'll see that the iPhone's > CoreFoundation classes are actually implemented in ObjC." > > Is that true? If the code is accessible (I did a cursory search but found > nothing, just this: http://opensource.apple.com/source/CF/ but I can't tell > if there are iPhone versions amongst this) could we use it (given the license > is compatible). If that were true, I'd expect CF_IS_OBJC() to return true for everything. It has the same code path for DEPLOYMENT_TARGET_MACOSX and DEPLOYMENT_TARGET_EMBEDDED (which, I believe, means iOS), and so probably it is not the case. That said, it would make sense, because iOS does not have a requirement be able to run Carbon code. On the other hand, neither did 64-bit OS X. Core Foundation is used by things like Launchd, and a variety of similar things on OS X (and iOS) that don't use any Objective-C code, so I'm not completely sure it is sensible. On the other hand, Apple decided to use COM for Quick Look, so sensible isn't necessarily a requirement... David -- Sent from my PDP-11 _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
