I can't for the life of me imagine why you would think that. I mean, I'm not
theorising here, I have actually done it. My very first Cocoa app was a
RubyCocoa app, and my second, a true, full-featured app, is just about done.
And you know what, I never did regret my decision to not really
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 4:20 AM, Allison Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
obj = [[SomeClass alloc] initWithName: @'my name' size: 16]
to
obj = SomeClass.alloc.initWithName_size('my name', 16)
And in Pascal:
obj := SomeClass.initWithName_size('my name', 16);
(alloc is called automatically)
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Allison Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really, once you figure out how to translate
obj = [[SomeClass alloc] initWithName: @'my name' size: 16]
to
obj = SomeClass.alloc.initWithName_size('my name', 16)
you're ready to start programming with RubyCocoa
Syntactical transformations, especially those where semantic parity is
retained, have never struck me as much of a barrier.
I am new to Objective C (though not to C) and have had a lot of
experience in Ruby, and I am struck by how structurally similar
Objective C and Ruby actually are.
Allison Newman said:
It's just that I can't help thinking about all of the comments that
we see on this list from people coming from Java or some other
language where header files aren't necessary, or which don't have
pointers. They are confused by these things, and having to learn
that
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Jose Raul Capablanca [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the exception of the id and SEL types,
categories, and the fact that you can send messages to nil, I can't think of
anything in Obj-C that isn't done better in Java,
Here is one: Integration with other
Michael Ash said:
I disagree with your assessment that there's nothing in ObjC that
isn't done better in Java
If you read my message again, I think you'll see that I didn't go as
far as to say that, or even to suggest it. In fact, I explicitly
mentioned features of Obj-C that are useful,
On Jun 7, 2008, at 9:01 PM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Jose Raul Capablanca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
With the exception of the id and SEL types,
categories, and the fact that you can send messages to nil, I can't
think of
anything in Obj-C that
I didn't say not to use Ruby if you want. What I took exception to is
your statement that you don't have to fully learn Objective-C's
syntax at the same time as Cocoa. Use whatever language you like,
but if you're going to use Cocoa, you'd *better* learn Objective-C.
-jcr
On Jun 7, 2008, at 7:38 AM, Jose Raul Capablanca wrote:
I never understood why Apple stopped supporting the Java bridge to
Cocoa.
Two reasons: First, not enough people were using it to make it cost-
effective to maintain, and second, it was sucking up a lot of
development time when new
Le 7 juin 08 à 22:26, WT a écrit :
I still don't see any good-enough *technical* reason to justify
basing Cocoa on an extension of C, however. That's all I've been
trying to say.
WT, I think this is an interesting question (as are your other
comments), and I think I have the answer :-)
Here is one: Integration with other languages
Java's integration with other languages (as using Java libraries in
other languages) is about one of the worse I've ever seen. It
basically makes any Java library accessible to only Java.
Yepp - the integration sucks but...
And a second one:
12 matches
Mail list logo
