home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!stein.u.washington.edu!basiji
- From: basiji@stein.u.washington.edu (David Basiji)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc
- Subject: Re: Why, Why, WHYYYY?? USE OBJECTIVE-C for IB??
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.000924.8898@u.washington.edu>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 00:09:24 GMT
- Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov17.000924.8898
- References: <1992Nov14.210958.19905@pages.com> <2B0818E3.6303@deneva.sdd.trw.com>
- Sender: news@u.washington.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: University of Washington
- Lines: 24
-
- thomsen@spf.trw.com (Mark Thomsen) writes:
-
- >Richard D Warner writes:
- >> I'm a developer who just wants to get a product out the door, and
- >> I'm frustrated about having to learn a new language just to interface with
- >> IB. I know you're supposed to be able to insert ANSI or C++ code into IB
- >> but I haven't been able to yet. You still need to know what's going on
- >> with the implementation files (in Objective-C). It's supposed to
- >> be "easier", but easier than what??? Why doesn't NeXT come up with a
- >> version of IB written for C++?
-
- >If you have already written lots of C++ that compiles stand-alone (can compile
- >on normally configured NeXT development system or with public domain libraries)
- >then I strongly suggest that you write a thin layer of Objective-C that fits
- >just on top of your C++ codes. The layer becomes the stuff to work with in
- >Interface Builder. Oh, and it takes a competent C programmer less than eight
- >hours to catch onto Objective-C ... in our experience which I have heard widely
- >shared.
-
- I found Objective C to be an intuitive extension of C and agree with the
- eight hour figure cited above. Further, if all you want to do is use
- IB's skeleton code, you could probably learn what you need in a few hours.
-
- David Basiji
-