Derek
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 1:44 PM Derek Fawcus <dfawcus+lists-gnustep-discuss@employees.org> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:52:36AM +0000, David Chisnall wrote:
> Oh, and with ARC, all of the C++ implementations have correct memory
> management for Objective-C, for free.
While dropping support for GCC does not strike me as a problem,
switching the core implementation to depend upon C++ may well do.
I'm not sure what to say to this other than LOL. Given that C++ still doesn't have some of the dynamic features of even the original ObjC it seems quite impossible. Also it contradicts the entire purpose of the framework... moving on...
How many developers are comfortable with C++?
I am comfortable with it, but not for the purposes of GNUstep.
I gave up on it a number of years ago, simply because IMO it was
too complex and fragile; basically I viewed it as an engineering
nightmare.
Gave up on what? GCC or C++?
Every project I've seen using it (either public, or commercial)
seem to use a different subset, and it can be difficult to spot
when a mechanism outwith that subset accidentally creeps in.
???
> Even today, I believe the Cairo back end is still using the 'toy' font
> APIs and not the ones that integrate with Harfbuzz, so we get quite poor
> kerning with Cairo and miss some important features.
I noticed that a few years ago. I'd have thought changing the Cairo
backend to use the real API should be independent of any support for
other backends (xlib, art).
Perhaps this is worth looking into.
DF
This thread was not meant to discuss deprecation but to determine the gap that exists between gcc's implementation of ObjC and clang's. I believe David summed it up succinctly.
Yours, GC
Gregory Casamento
GNUstep Lead Developer / OLC, Principal Consultant
http://www.gnustep.org - http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
http://ind.ie/phoenix/
GNUstep Lead Developer / OLC, Principal Consultant
http://www.gnustep.org - http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
http://ind.ie/phoenix/