[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[6]: KeyValueCoding (was Recent key-value encoding changes to NSObject
From: |
Manuel Guesdon |
Subject: |
Re[6]: KeyValueCoding (was Recent key-value encoding changes to NSObject.) |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:45:02 +0100 (CET) |
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 12:27:40 +0000 Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden>
wrote:
>| >> | I think that you are talking about webobjects specific behavior. You
>| >> | can tell this by the fact that this
>| >> | is only documented in the webobjects documentation, and the fact
>| >> that it
>| >> | doesn't work like this in MacOS-X
>| >> | (I checked by running a test program on MacOS-X 10.1.3).
>| >> |
>| >> | It looks to me like most (if not all) of the methods in your source
>| >> file
>| >> | are webobjects specific ones
>| >> | which are not present in the apple Foundation.
>| >
>| > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this mean that we'll have a
>| > different behavious between NSArray in base and NSArray in
>| > GNUstepWeb/EOF:
>| > Exemple 1:
>| > NSArray -valueForKey:@"something" won't find a value in
>| > base
>| > but in gsweb NSArray -valueForKey:@"something" will return
>| > an array of results of performing valueForKey:@"something" on each
>| > object of
>| > the array
>|
>| Yes.
>|
>| > Exemple 2:
>| > NSArray -valueForKey:@"lastObject" will return the last
>| > object of the array in base
>| > but in gsweb NSArray -valueForKey:@"lastObject" will return
>| > an array of results of performing valueForKey:@"lastObject" on each
>| > object of
>| > the array
>|
>| Yes.
>|
>| > Same kind of problem in NSDictionary
>|
>| Yes.
>|
>| > Don't you think the performXXforKey mecanism is interesting not only
>| > for EOF but for other uses ?
>|
>| Yes.
>| But people wanting it for other uses should be able to link with the
>| appropriate libraries.
>| The fact that an idea is neat is a reason to have it available, but not
>| a reason to include
>| it with everything.
>|
>| My point ... which I obviously haven't managed to make clear yet ... is
>| that we should not
>| introduce unexpected behaviors into the software without good reason.
>|
>| A program built using the Foundation framework should work much the same
>| way as a program
>| built using the base library.
>| A program built using Foundation and WebObjects should work much the
>| same way as a program
>| built using base and gsweb.
>|
>| Now I realise that this stuff has been dropped from Apples ObjC API ...
>| but to me that means
>| the best place to put it is probably an EOF clone (since Apple have
>| dropped EOF), and have
>| gsweb depend on the EOF code. I'd like to see a decent EOF as part of
>| GNUstep.
>|
>| If/when apple move these extra methods into Foundation, we should move
>| them into base.
>| That way, people porting will get the behaviors they expect, and we will
>| be able to use
>| whichever behavior we want.
OK. So, to summarize before freezing things in EOF/GSWeb: with your last
changes (rewrite of KVC in base to use cstrings), we consider that KVC in base
is finished
(except bug and/or Apple futur changes) and I'll implement EOF/GSWeb feature in
their own libraries. right ?
Manuel
--
______________________________________________________________________
Manuel Guesdon - OXYMIUM <address@hidden>
14 rue Jean-Baptiste Clement - 93200 Saint-Denis - France
Tel: +33 1 4940 0999 - Fax: +33 1 4940 0998