Shaz, I do agree with your concern. I see no particular need for adding any objc++ features at the moment. Was just curious ;)
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think there is a "stance" against Objective-C++. > > Namely my thinking is, perhaps contributions could suffer? Probably > most of the committers know C++, but this might deter contribs from > people that do not know C++ -- to fix something, or contrib something > new to a core plugin that already uses C++. Often these are web > developers that are already having challenges with Objective-C. > > Having said that, I have no objection to using Objective-C++. > > There's only a few restrictions for Objective-C++: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-C#Objective-C.2B.2B > > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]> wrote: >> More seriously though, I have a c++ background and find the new clang >> features appealing. Not sure that this is warranted, but what is the >> stance on objective c++? >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I don't get it shaz, are you concatenating strings inside a function >>> block there? >>> >>> [NSDictionary ....5000 words...nil]]]]]; is sooooo much clearer! >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Apple's policy of forcing people to update is pretty harsh IMO, but it is >>>> their policy, so we might as well follow it :) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Jesse <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I can't tell if that was sarcasm Shaz. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> > Yeah :) >>>>> > >>>>> > NSDictionary* dict = @{ >>>>> > @"foo" : @"fooo", >>>>> > @"bar" : @"barr", >>>>> > @"baz" : @"bazz" >>>>> > }; >>>>> > >>>>> > is sooo much better than: >>>>> > >>>>> > NSDictionary* dict = [NSDictionary >>>>> > withObjects:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:@"fooo", @"barr", >>>>> @"bazz", nil] >>>>> > forKeys:[NSArray arrayWithObjects:@"foo", @"bar", @"baz", nil] >>>>> > ]; >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >> Awesome. Those language goodies should be nice to incorporate. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>> Also, in requiring Xcode 4.5, we can use these new language goodies: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> • Objective-C @synthesize command is generated by default when using >>>>> properties. >>>>> >>> • Objective-C adds literal syntax for numbers, arrays, dictionaries, >>>>> >>> and expressions when developing for OS X. >>>>> >>> • Apple LLVM compiler supports additional C++11 features, including >>>>> lambdas. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>> Issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1145 >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Xcode 4.5 is now required because Apple requires it for the App Store >>>>> >>>> (latest SDK is required - at this time it is iOS 6, which only comes >>>>> >>>> with Xcode 4.5). >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Xcode 4.5 does not build for armv6, thus the minimum supported target >>>>> >>>> is iOS 4.3 which removes support for the iPhone 3G and iPod Touch 2nd >>>>> >>>> Gen. The original iPhone and iPod Touch 1st Gen have been out a long >>>>> >>>> time ago since they didn't have iOS 4 support in the first place. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Although you can _set_ the deployment target to 4.2 in Xcode 4.5, >>>>> >>>> that >>>>> >>>> is ultimately useless once you deploy the app to an armv6 device >>>>> >>>> since >>>>> >>>> it will not have the right architecture and thus will not run. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> @purplecabbage >>>>> risingj.com >>>>>
