on 2/12/01 4:03 AM, Bill Cheeseman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> True. The real, and overwhelming, advantage of Cocoa is its ease of
> development. You don't have to delve into the basement-level detail that
> Carbon development requires, if you don't want to. In Carbon, you have to
> machine your own nuts and bolts, assemble the furnace, and construct the
> mechanicals room before you can build the house. In Cocoa, you just pull the
> mechanicals room off the shelve and put it in the house. At the same time,
> you don't lose the ability to customize the mechanicals room to your heart's
> content. Design a better furnace, if you like, and just replace the one that
> came with the prefab mechanicals room. For these reasons, if you're starting
> a new application from scratch (or if the code of your old application is so
> skanky that it really needs to be replaced), Cocoa is the way to go.
There is a much larger checklist to check off before deciding on Carbon
development. If you have to use C++ for any reason, Carbon will likely be
the better choice. There are others, even though Cocoa replaces things like
PowerPlant, there is a body of knowledge in Carbon that can't be replaced by
items that are available in Cocoa. I honestly don't see many long-time Mac
developers starting to develop on Cocoa anytime soon.
jud
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
