Re: Install gnustep-base standalone

[dieymir]

Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org> wrote in message 
news:<mailman.2981.1114469849.2895.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>...
> On 25. Apr 2005, at 18:27 Uhr, dieymir wrote:
> Ah, OK, so you mean "incomplete wrt OpenStep Foundation API". Yes, 
> thats right and we do not target for that.
> Having said that I don't think that libFoundation is "inmature" 
> compared to gnustep-base. The latter just has more stuff in it.
> 
OK, libFoundation it's useful for lot of people now, that's the only
important thing.

> Personally I would prefer that gnustep-base evolves into a state so 
> that it can be used for non-GNUstep development (eg no GNUstep.sh, 
> proper integration into Unix/Windows).
> 
I'm with you on this, see my request later in this thread.

> > In fact I'm very interesting in libFoundation because I want to
> > program in Objective-C and any modern OO language needs an utility
> > library like C++ STL or Java API to be completely useful, I think that
> > the lack of such thing makes lot of harm to ObjC. gnustep-base has the
> > problem that it's very integrated in the GNUstep environment and it's
> > not intended to be used standalone like any other library you can link
> > and this is what I like about libFoundation.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure I get your point. IMHO you map "incomplete wrt 
> OpenStep" to "immature". The latter certainly does not hold true for 
> lF.
> 
I'm interested in the libFoundation 'concept', an utility library (a
Foundation implementation because it's a 'de facto standard') for
those who want to program in Objective-C but aren't interested in
GNUstep development, you state the same above.

Regards.