Just to toss out an opinion from the sideline, I tend to agree more with Jim's assessment that Apple's desire not to see interpreted code is less about technical performance and security concerns and more about territorial business concerns. (I also don't disagree with their business savvy, because it appears to be working).
As evidence to this belief, a client of mine recently had an app rejected. After they sent an email explaining how there may have been a misunderstanding, and that app wouldn't allow for or require money to flow outside the app store, the app was approved just a few days later. --Jon On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Matt Aimonetti <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Guyren G Howe <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 25, 2009, at 13:13 , Neal Clark wrote: >> >> > IIRC apple has a policy against running interpreted code on the >> > iphone. while bundling an interpreter with your application code into >> > an executable may strictly speaking produce a 'binary', the >> > application would not be compiled. >> >> This kind of crap is worse than just about anything MS ever did, and >> is the reason I can't see myself ever getting an iPhone. Just saying. > > > > I believe that the main reason for that decision was to keep the device > secure and efficient. > Interpreted languages are slower and require more resources. Now, if he can > manage to get > his js code to run on top of the obj-c runtime, he can compile down to > binary like MacRuby > is trying to do. If he would to use webkit I can tell you his apps were > dead slow. > > Targeting all these platforms is an honorable choice, but it's very > challenging, especially nowadays with the various APIs you have to deal > with. > Challenging doesn't mean impossible and we will see once the mac version > will be stable to use, people might get really excited and push > the dev further. > > - Matt > > > > > >> >> >> > and even if they did allow it, i'd expect them to take some position >> > against embedding spidemonkey when webkit is at developer's disposal. >> >> Perhaps icodemac intends to use Webkit, or at least its JS engine. >> >> I'll also note that icodemac's model is basically the same as the Pre, >> so I'm hoping he'll do that eventually. >> >> Even if it doesn't do phones, though, this will be unique if it does >> Mac, Windows, Linux and browser. And he's proven he can do this kind >> of thing before. >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
