On 27 abr, 09:49, Christian Edward Gruber <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, and as a total side-note, I used Objective-C on solaris all the > time, and would prefer to use it over Java every single time, but for > its lack of support on other platforms where I have to deploy. Choice > of static or dynamic typing as needed, quasi-AOP abilities, selector- > based messaging rather than function pointers or v-tables - and now > with garbage collection, plus a really really nice base-class library > (java's is not, and I worked for sun and now work for Google, so I'm > not ignorant in these matters).
Do you mean, the Frankenstein mix of manual allocation, semiautomatic allocation (auto release pools with reference counting) and fully automatic allocation of Obj-C 2.0 (btw a simple non-copying collector, although at least it's not conservative...)? No thanks. As for the choice of dynamic/static typing, difficult to defend when you see the evolutionary trend of all modern static-typed languages (i.e., type inference, not dynamic dyping - so you get both compile-time safety and efficient code generation, simpler code, and optionally type- polymorphic code in some langs). Message selectors: Java-like interfaces (or even better, traits like in Scala) give you 90% of the flexibility while not forcing you into any tradeoffs of compile-time safety or performance. The major remaining advantage of dynamic typing (*) is advanced metaprogramming, still I don't think the tradeoff is good to put all that baggage (static typing + inference + generics + dynamic typing...) in a single typesystem. Once again Obj-C's design is obsolete, it was ok when it was created because type inference was not mature (stuff like ML was in the diapers), but that was then and this is now. (*) Except perhaps for radical, next-gen dynamic languages like NewSpeak. But then, these don't carry the mammoth legacy of C semantics that Obj-C carries. > I don't mind Java, especially with recent improvements, and Objective- > C should have evolved more in this time, but the truth is, Java is > only just now becoming even half as easy to program a complex app in a > small amount of code. I was so much more productive in terms of, oh, > I don't know, features-per-line-of-code (to pick a bullshit metric) in > Obj-C over Java. <sigh> > > Anyway, just one java guru's view... > > Christian.. > > On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 AM, opinali wrote: > > > > > Quoting my take on Objective-C from Simon's blog (http:// > >www.psynixis.com/blog/2010/04/11/the-risk-apple-is-taking-with-its-ne...) > > : > > > "Objective-C is a FAILED programming language. It would be totally > > extinct if Steve Jobs wouldn’t pick it and mandate it use since the > > NeXT and now in the OSX and iPhoneOS platforms. At NeXT time it was > > still an interesting, innovative language (compared to the competition > > in its class: early C++, and… nothing else). But times change and Obj- > > C didn’t. And it was a bad approach to start with — a naive attempt to > > snatch some pieces of Smalltalk into C. (Hint: dynamic versus static > > typing, and other incongruencies.) If Obj-C was a language with > > merits, it would have met some degree of success in other platforms. > > There’s even a full GNU compiler (gcc-objc) and frameworks (OpenStep) > > that could be used to port classic NeXT apps to any OS. But the uptake > > of Obj-C on any platforms where it’s not mandated as the official > > language, was close to zero. Other, superior languages appeared and > > developers picked those languages and ignored Obj-C. Except of course, > > the poor bastards who live under Steve’s heavy boots. Even the likes > > of Eiffel were massively popular in comparison. Steve Jobs once > > infamously referred to Java as the “heavy ball and chain”. Well, > > that’s exactly my feeling if I was an iPhoneOS developer who prefer > > alternatives like C# (MonoTouch) but was forced to use the monkey dung > > that Obj-C is. Apple is using the power of their successful platform > > to chain developers to a clunky SDK that many many devs would avoid if > > they had a chance. (The only reason why Obj-C is heavily used in the > > first years of the platform is, of course, absence of alternative > > options. Now these options are popping everywhere, and Apple knows > > they are all superior in many aspects, so their only choice to keep > > lock-in is rule out other tools by fiat.)" > > > A+ > > Osvaldo > > > On 26 abr, 03:50, wilfred <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Listening to the last episode right now, in particular the comments > >> on > >> Apple's decision to ban anything but Objective C based apps from the > >> iPhone and iPad. Next to me, on top of a pile of books, there is a > >> book opened up on a page that has some ties with what is being > >> discussed. It's part of an open letter to Steve Jobs, dating from > >> 1996: > > >> "Dear Steve, > >> .... > >> Drop Objective C. There's no money to be made supporting yet another > >> object language. Use C++ with SOM and you;ll get all the same > >> benefits > >> without the headaches. If you don't like C++, use Smalltalk with > >> CORBA > >> - it will also give you the same results. > >> ...." > > >> It's part of Robert Orfali's book on Distributed Object Computing. I > >> think it's pretty hilarious, looking back. Rather than scaring > >> developers off - as the authors expected - Objective C is now being > >> used to scare people away from targeting anything but Steve's > >> platform. > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> Groups "The Java Posse" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected] > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group > >> athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en > >> . > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "The Java Posse" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] > > . > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en > > . > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
