Re: How viable is Cocoa development?

FROM : Ondra Cada
DATE : Sat Jan 26 14:35:57 2002

Rainer,

>>>>>> Rainer Brockerhoff (RB) wrote at Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:30:35 -0200:
RB> I may be mistaken here, since I haven't done a systematic examination...
RB> but I had occasion to trace into the machine code of several Cocoa
RB> implementations (notably in file handling), and they appear to call
RB> Carbon File Manager routines often. Quite a few parts of Cocoa seem to be
RB> just a thin shell over the equivalent Carbon calls.
RB>
RB> You might argue that this is a consequence of HFS+ support, I suppose...

I would argue it is a consequence of a bad design. I would argue it should 
have been done the very opposite way:

(i) extend Cocoa to cope properly with HFS+ and other news, and...
(ii) make Carbon a thin compatibility shell over it!

That way the application consistency would be *WAYS* better, there would be 
no problem of APIs lacking in Cocoa, and what seems to me to be the MOST 
important, the applications would be also runtime-consistent: things like 
Mike Ferris' TextExtras or my OCSmart Hacks would properly work system-wide 
(but Classic of course, but Classic is explicitly an emulator).
---
Ondra Cada
OCSoftware:    <email_removed>              http://www.ocs.cz
2K Development: o.<email_removed>  http://www.2kdevelopment.cz
private        <email_removed>            http://www.ocs.cz/oc