On 1/11/14, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 11, 2014, at 3:50 PM, Darin Adler <da...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 11, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ideally it should be USE(THE_SPECIFIC_FRAMEWORK_IN_QUESTION). I would
>>> guess that much of PLATFORM(MAC) that is valid for both Mac and iOS
>>> should actually be USE(FOUNDATION). PLATFORM really shouldn't be used for
>>> things other than terminal platform names. USE(COCOA) would be an ok
>>> stopgap if sorting down to more specific conditionals delays this cleanup
>>> too much.
>>
>> Sorting down to specific conditionals will definitely delay the cleanup
>> too much!
>>
>> Thinking about USE(FOUNDATION) and looking at code it’s clear that the Mac
>> and iOS ports have a lot more in common than Foundation. I saw that
>> looking at PLATFORM(MAC) code snippets.
>
> I saw that too after looking at more.
>
>> But as long as we’re going to have something incorrect as a first
>> approximation, I don’t think that incorrect uses of USE(FOUNDATION) are
>> significantly worse than incorrect uses of USE(COCOA). If long term there
>> is not supposed to be such a thing as USE(COCOA), then I would hate to add
>> it and then have to remove it later.
>>
>> It remains clear to me that a valuable and quick first step is to
>> mechanically change PLATFORM(MAC) to BAR, and I am OK with BAR being
>> USE(FOUNDATION), USE(COCOA), or PLATFORM(COCOA).
>>
>> I am sure there is a lot of easy refinement we can do immediately after.
>> For example, we can change BAR && !PLATFORM(IOS) back to PLATFORM(MAC), if
>> we can’t find an even better conditional. Maybe our first step can even be
>> clever and not ever change such things to BAR, as suggested by Dan.
>>
>> I’d like to play the numbers game, so if our best guess is that most
>> PLATFORM(MAC) should be USE(FOUNDATION), I would choose that for BAR.
>
> After thinking about it a bit - USE(COCOA) (or for that matter even
> PLATFORM(COCOA)) might be better as a first cut. Since it's not supposed to
> exist at all long term, it makes for an easy number to drive to zero.
> USE(FOUNDATION) will mix both correct and incorrect uses so it will be
> harder to drive the mistaken applications to zero.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>

I'm new here, so sorry if I’m intruding since I don’t have much of a
stake in this outcome, but USE(COCOA) then seems to imply to me that
you need to also have a USE(COCOATOUCH). It so, then maybe it should
be AppKit vs. UIKit instead for more clarity.

There is another potential case where you have an Obj-C framework
environment that is not Apple’s. I’ll cite GNUStep and Apportable as
two cases. The former provides a Cocoa (AppKit) compatible
implementation but tends to run on Linux or Windows. The latter
provides a UIKit compatible implementation and tends to run on
Android.

This asks the question, do you really mean Mac vs. iOS, or AppKit vs.
UIKit, or something else?

Thanks,
Eric
-- 
Beginning iPhone Games Development
http://playcontrol.net/iphonegamebook/
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Reply via email to