And why would they?  What is apples motivation?  Is it to piss everyone off?  
Is it to appear anti-competitive?  Is it to kill innovation?  Is it a vendetta 
against xtalk or other programming languages?

Look at it this way...  Lets say a some terrorists take out the world trade 
centers with commercial jets.  You know they are all middle eastern.  Do you 
stop all middle eastern looking people from traveling?  Well you would have to 
if you didn't have scanners.  With scanners you can bypass a person's 
appearance and only hassle those holding weapons.  By having access to source 
in one language, apple can scan apps to insure safety and other apple specific 
interests and still allow everyone to "free to move about the airplane".

Randall

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Yennie <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 7:40 PM
To: How to use Revolution <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Check out Jerry's new videos -- REV to ObjC -> iPhone

Josh,

Except, if a tool like Rev were generating the code to paste in, it would 
inevitably contain large portions of identical code across projects. Apple 
could easily ban any app that matches those very clear signatures.

> 
> 
> On May 8, 2010, at 11:28 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Ruslan Zasukhin wrote:
>> 
>>> RevMobile before it seems was going generate c# sources?
>>> Strange choice as for me.
>>> Main engine should go to C,
>>> Some parts of REV project also to C
>>> And GUI part of REV project to ObjC - Cocoa.
>> 
>> This is forbidden by the new license. There can be no translations. All work 
>> must be created originally by Apple-specified tools.
> 
> Of course, if you pasted the C code into Xcode and built your app there, 
> there would be no way Apple could tell the code was not written in Xcode. 
> Text is text.
> 
> I've compared Revtalk and C a little bit and there are some code structures 
> that are so similar translation would be easy (if then, switch). Chunk 
> expressions are an example of something that would not translate, so there 
> would have to be a special set of handlers that split strings and returned 
> items, and in Revtalk you'd need to call these functions rather than using 
> the stock ones to make the C output feasible.
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Reply via email to