If the equivalent functionality is exposed on the other implementation, I don't see why not.
If not, care should be taken for maintainability reasons. I also think it's perfectly fine to not expose functionality. Like on the other implementation, if you decide to use a private interface and it breaks, you get to keep the pieces. On Fri, Sep 23, 2016, 18:08 Giah de Barag <g...@crelg.com> wrote: > The preponderance of private interfaces in GNUstep frustrates the use by > users of categories to extend functionality. > > Is there an objection to exposing some of the hidden interfaces? For > example, in Apple, NSExpression.h is exposed, but in GNUstep it is hidden > inside NSPredicate.m. Also there are a few GNUstep-internal helper classes > that begin with GS* that are frustratingly hidden that I would like to > expose. > > Any objections? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > discuss-gnus...@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep >
_______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
