Gustavo,
NSCoder and all of its implementations
(NSArchiver/NSUnarchiver/NSKeyedArchiver/NSKeyedUnarchiver) are entirely
implemented in Foundation/Base. Unless you need to archive (or unarchive)
AppKit/GUI classes, then you really don't have any need for AppKit/GUI.
What are your requirements?
To be even more specific, most of what I do would have to do with NSCoding and
storing NSAttributedString attributes—most of which are part of AppKit, not
Foundation.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020, at 5:39 PM, Gustavo Tavares wrote:
> Confirming, I just need headless so that I have access to the AppKit
The simplest solution to get this is to just create an app without a
model. GUI will be initialized, but no nib/gorm/etc will be loaded. You
should be able to access all of the AppKit/GUI functions.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:40 PM Gustavo Tavares
wrote:
> Confirming, I just need headless so
Confirming, I just need headless so that I have access to the AppKit functions
I call.
I don’t need any output whatsoever.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020, at 5:22 PM, Gregory Casamento wrote:
>
> Gustavo,
>
> What is your true aim here? If having a "headless" application is all you
> really need, so
Fred,
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:19 PM Fred Kiefer wrote:
> Not sure, whether we are all looking for the same thing here. The question
> is which of the gui functionality would your server application use?
>
> Greg is asking for Postscript output.
I am not asking for postscript output, I am
Gustavo,
What is your true aim here? If having a "headless" application is all you
really need, so that you have access to AppKit functions then that is
pretty easy. You don't need to have a gui model (xib, nib, gorm, etc)
attached to the application.
I like the idea of a no-op or null backend
Not sure, whether we are all looking for the same thing here. The question is
which of the gui functionality would your server application use?
Greg is asking for Postscript output. We already have a very primitive way for
that in the gsc classes so something would be there already. But for a
Yes, Fred, Greg,
This is exactly what I need and was looking at doing just that. I did some
no-op classes but I have very little experience with there system to do so
immediately.
It doesn’t look like a lot of files but I might be wrong. There are a lot of
subtle interactions that I have
This is a really interesting notion. Would the no-op backend (I think we
need a better name) be able to print, or output postscript? Would it be
possible to use it for testing GUI in some way?
GC
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 12:06 PM Fred Kiefer wrote:
> Your problem got me thinking. Would it
Your problem got me thinking. Would it help you if we offered a „no-op“ backend
for GNUstep? That is a backend where both the window and the drawing system
would be implemented as no-operations.
We could try to get this done as a special GNUstep back configuration. Most
likely we could cheat
10 matches
Mail list logo
