On 2 Aug 2011, at 19:02, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: > And nowadays we really need to test builds with clang, new runtime, and with > the latest gcc and the new gcc runtime, and we have two new GC variants ...
I regularly run the test suite with FreeBSD/x86-32 and Linux/x86-64, both with the non-fragile ABI for everything (clang + libobjc2). > So three different compiler/runtime setups at least, various cpu > architectures, and now four memory management schemes (trad retain/release, > gc with gnu runtime, gc with new runtime, automated retain/release). > That's a lot to get tested ... so the timescale may not be realistic :-( ARC is not a new scheme, it's intended to be compatible with manual retain / release. You can't mix ARC and non-ARC code in the same compilation unit, but you can mix them in different .o files in the same project. Most of the ARC-related changes are tweaking method declarations so that they can be called from ARC. GNUstep is not built with ARC - that would require some massive and invasive changes to the code - it is just used with code that is compiled in ARC mode. Think of ARC like C99 or C++ - you can mix GNUstep's Objective-C89 code with Objective-C99 or or Objective-C++0x code in other projects, as long as the GNUstep headers are compatible with these languages. I'm happy to call the Apple-compatible GC mode experimental in the next release. Apple seems to be ditching this mode in the long term (everyone at Apple except the 5 guys on the autozone team hates it) so it's mainly of interest to people who are porting code that only worked on OS X >=10.5 (not iOS or OS X <=10.4) to GNUstep, so I'm not sure it's of much interest in the long term as more than a tick in a feature checklist. David -- Sent from my IBM 1620 _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep