Josh, The issue isn't whether Apple wants to outlaw reusing code libraries. They don't. They want to outlaw cross platform development. The point is why try and go around this process by creating a Rev to C tool, when it's likely they can identify the resulting binaries? It's still against their terms.
I would think it unwise for RR to invest significantly more development dollars to try and skirt around the rules. Obviously Adobe felt the same way. Chipp Walters CEO, Shafer Walters Group, Inc On May 10, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Josh Mellicker <j...@dvcreators.net> wrote: > True. Even if I programmed everything in Xcode, exactly as Apple wanted, but > reused my own C libraries I created in Xcode, they could ban my apps due to > the repeated code (fingerprint). > > They could ban a drawing app because, conceivably, you might draw porn with > it, or for any other reason. > > Cheers, > Josh > > On May 9, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Brian Yennie <bri...@qldlearning.com> wrote: > >> Josh, >> >> Except, if a tool like Rev were generating the code to paste in, it would >> inevitably contain large portions of identical code across projects. Apple >> could easily ban any app that matches those very clear signatures. >> >>> >>> >>> On May 8, 2010, at 11:28 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <jac...@hyperactivesw.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Ruslan Zasukhin wrote: >>>> >>>>> RevMobile before it seems was going generate c# sources? >>>>> Strange choice as for me. >>>>> Main engine should go to C, >>>>> Some parts of REV project also to C >>>>> And GUI part of REV project to ObjC - Cocoa. >>>> >>>> This is forbidden by the new license. There can be no translations. All >>>> work must be created originally by Apple-specified tools. >>> >>> Of course, if you pasted the C code into Xcode and built your app there, >>> there would be no way Apple could tell the code was not written in Xcode. >>> Text is text. >>> >>> I've compared Revtalk and C a little bit and there are some code structures >>> that are so similar translation would be easy (if then, switch). Chunk >>> expressions are an example of something that would not translate, so there >>> would have to be a special set of handlers that split strings and returned >>> items, and in Revtalk you'd need to call these functions rather than using >>> the stock ones to make the C output feasible. >> _______________________________________________ >> use-revolution mailing list >> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription >> preferences: >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
