Hi Nic. Am 15.04.2010 um 10:30 schrieb Nic Carter:
> Just one quick thing, though: PocketSword will be one app that works on both > iPad and iPhone/iPod touch. I was looking at this today and I think this > will be the best way forward. Apple have designed everything so that this is > easily possible, with one codebase... :) Well, I know iPhone Apps work almost unchanged on iPad. But the iPad had a much larger display and I think that eventually it also offers more possibilities in terms of UI so that maybe sooner or later a new iPad application will be there. Even if there were only small changes in Interface Builder XIBs/NIBs and view controllers you would need to branch. I'm also not sure whether the UI design guidelines are the same for both. If I look at iWork on the iPad for example then this is a completely new set of applications with a new designed UI especially for the iPad. > Oh, and to answer your question about NSUserDefaults, yes, that's there! I > have just added unlocking of modules to PocketSword, which will be available > in v1.2.2 (currently in beta), and that works great using the code in > SwordModule.mm :) Alright, good to know. Manfred > > Thanks for this work, Manfred! :) > ybic > nic... :) > > ---- > Nic Carter > PocketSword Developer - an iPhone Bible Study app > www: http://crosswire.org/pocketsword > iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/app/Pocketsword/id341046078 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/pocketsword > > On 15/04/2010, at 7:15 PM, Manfred Bergmann wrote: > >> Hi there. >> >> Now with the iPad already released in USA and in other countries shortly I'd >> like to push for a consolidation of the Objective-C++ SWORD wrapper classes. >> Which over time has grown quite large consisting of 20 classes in the >> version MacSword uses. Just for an explanation to others, they build the >> basis for SWORD based OS X applications and are intended to be able to code >> in Objective-C exclusively in upper levels of the application (UI). >> PocketSword uses a subset of those classes with some modifications. >> >> Now shortly since I believe we will again branch for the iPad because it >> will be a different UI eventually I feel that we have to do something now. >> Otherwise we will end up having to maintain three code bases which could be >> one. And it will be a mess. >> >> Since MacSword 2.2 was released recently I have some time now to work on >> this. >> I would suggest to make a framework of the Objective-C wrapper classes which >> can then be used in any OS X (Cocoa) based application just as easily as >> other frameworks can be used. It would still be necessary to have different >> builds for ARM and Intel/PPC and Xcode projects but those can use the same >> code base. >> If any user of the framework needs customised behaviour it is still possible >> to subclass if really needed. >> >> The things that need closer look are: >> - Make it work in gc and none-gc environments. >> In MacSword 2.2 refactorings I tried to put in -dealloc and -finalize >> methods in all classes I touched together with autoreleased initialisations. >> - Logging. >> This might need some time. While I would like to be able to write logs to >> file with specifying log levels this is not something the iPhone/iPad wants >> due to slower FS access. But I'm sure there is a solution to this. If some >> protocols are defined each front-end can still implement it's own logging >> implementation. >> - Code that uses NSUserDefaults. >> Right now keys for locked modules are stored in NSUserDefaults. Is this >> something that works on iPhoneOS? >> - Searching/indexing. >> While the iPhone uses the SWORD provided clucene based indexing and >> searching MacSword uses SearchKit. >> This not a problem at all but we have to define a protocol where each >> application can implement a provider. >> - Further we would need a place to source control it. Can we have a place >> for it at CrossWire including a new project in Jira? >> >> Comments? >> >> Nic, if you are busy with things for PocketSword right now, don't worry. I >> would start working on this, compare both code bases and would start a >> discussion with you about things I'm uncertain - if you give your "go" to do >> this all. >> I'd also like to finally put in some Unit tests for critical parts so that >> it can be tested more easily. Unfortunately Unit testing is not so >> comfortable in Obj-C as it is in Java. >> >> >> >> Manfred >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
