FROM : Todd Blanchard
DATE : Sun Apr 24 08:36:13 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 23, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Zacharias J. Beckman wrote:
> API refactoring is common; simply because you use Objective-C doesn't
> mean it won't happen. But what I will most miss -- if it's not in
> XCode2 -- will be the ability to quickly redesign my API and have the
> IDE do the "grunt work."
Oh waaah. Jeeze - if people would put a little thought into their api
in the first place, maybe they wouldn't need all these crutches.
> 1. Automatically implement a subclass of an abstract super. It lets me
> specify which methods to implement (and which to ignore) and puts in
> template code for me.
There are no abstract classes in Objective C.
> 2. Rename a method, project-wide. Eclipse does a fantastic job of
> scanning the entire project and updating all code references to your
> method, even in the documentation. It even lets me pick-and-choose
> what changes I want (or I can just say "do it all"). In other words,
> it asks you want you want refactored and what it shouldn't touch.
Of the half dozen times I've ever renamed a method, there were maybe 3
places in the code that I had to go touch.
> 3. Class renaming works the same way -- Eclipse will do the job for
> you so you don't have to refactor your code manually.
Class renaming can be easily done with global search and replace. I
know of no time that this does not work.
> 4. "Push up" an abstract superclass or interface based on code
> analysis.
There are no abstract classes in Objective C.
> 5. "Use supertype where possible," Eclipse will analyze my code and
> abstract it a bit more for me (in other words, if I use a literal cast
> where I could use an interface it will make that adjustment for me).
> n. well, etc., etc.
There is no need to cast in Objective C.
> There are other features lacking, at least at first glance, in XCode
> that I'll miss sorely. The code completion and analysis is not up to
> par with Eclipse.
Yes, but this is mitigated by the fact that Cocoa has consistent naming
conventions - unlike that other hot beverage environment. So I can
actually remember most of it.
Anyhow, this thread ought to die - its not really about Cocoa
development. There's a mailing list for XCode, go whine over there.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFCaz5ehullemWJdQ8RAnoLAKDAaAAoRa9i6wp2RT1c8GmHnyyUCgCff9+U
efmKUhCO2AVskkbYN3fILhI=
=yOJ7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
DATE : Sun Apr 24 08:36:13 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 23, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Zacharias J. Beckman wrote:
> API refactoring is common; simply because you use Objective-C doesn't
> mean it won't happen. But what I will most miss -- if it's not in
> XCode2 -- will be the ability to quickly redesign my API and have the
> IDE do the "grunt work."
Oh waaah. Jeeze - if people would put a little thought into their api
in the first place, maybe they wouldn't need all these crutches.
> 1. Automatically implement a subclass of an abstract super. It lets me
> specify which methods to implement (and which to ignore) and puts in
> template code for me.
There are no abstract classes in Objective C.
> 2. Rename a method, project-wide. Eclipse does a fantastic job of
> scanning the entire project and updating all code references to your
> method, even in the documentation. It even lets me pick-and-choose
> what changes I want (or I can just say "do it all"). In other words,
> it asks you want you want refactored and what it shouldn't touch.
Of the half dozen times I've ever renamed a method, there were maybe 3
places in the code that I had to go touch.
> 3. Class renaming works the same way -- Eclipse will do the job for
> you so you don't have to refactor your code manually.
Class renaming can be easily done with global search and replace. I
know of no time that this does not work.
> 4. "Push up" an abstract superclass or interface based on code
> analysis.
There are no abstract classes in Objective C.
> 5. "Use supertype where possible," Eclipse will analyze my code and
> abstract it a bit more for me (in other words, if I use a literal cast
> where I could use an interface it will make that adjustment for me).
> n. well, etc., etc.
There is no need to cast in Objective C.
> There are other features lacking, at least at first glance, in XCode
> that I'll miss sorely. The code completion and analysis is not up to
> par with Eclipse.
Yes, but this is mitigated by the fact that Cocoa has consistent naming
conventions - unlike that other hot beverage environment. So I can
actually remember most of it.
Anyhow, this thread ought to die - its not really about Cocoa
development. There's a mailing list for XCode, go whine over there.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFCaz5ehullemWJdQ8RAnoLAKDAaAAoRa9i6wp2RT1c8GmHnyyUCgCff9+U
efmKUhCO2AVskkbYN3fILhI=
=yOJ7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






Cocoa mail archive

