Re: Is GNUstep really cross platform? (was: FW: GNUstep on MS Windows (Oh boy...i've done it now!))

[Philip Mötteli]

Am 05.12.2003 um 08:02 schrieb John Davidorff Pell:
> We seem to have VERY diff sets of information.

Well, as I said, I use GS on my everyday work (not paid, 
unfortunately). GDL2 and GSWeb, which are huge packages with a 
tremedous functionality, work here. So don't tell me I'm not using it.


> If you ignore the opinions (which from your email seems to be 
> unlikely, no offense), you'll find that there is a whole lot that I 
> had to do to get a GNUstep-base to compile in a usable way, including 
> compiling GNU's objc runtime. GNUSTEP BASE WILL NOT WORK ON APPLE's 
> RUNTIME! The "additions" do compile, but then I don't have a working 
> GNUstep-base, and no DO.
>
> FYI, I have never used, nor know anyone who uses, ONLY GNUstep-base. 
> I'm talking about GNUstep as in ALL OG GNUStep, including GNUstep-gui.

Why would you want to duplicate AppKit and Foundation with something 
identical? You have redundancy, an awful lot more work for nothing and 
you're not compatibel with the rest of the system (even copy paste 
shouldn't work).
The only reason could be, if you want to run some specific 
GS-applications. But we have on MOSX for every GS application something 
at the very least equivalent. So there's no reason, to not use the 
native things from MOSX if they are available and only port the 
differences. Then, DO and NSInvocation and all that work without a 
problem.


> On Dec 4, 2003, at 1:55 PM, Philip Mötteli wrote:
>
> > Am 04.12.2003 um 21:57 schrieb John Davidorff Pell:
> > > I think that the biggest thing that GNUstep could do is make it run 
> > > on the next runtime, or even make it compile and link its own gnu 
> > > runtime on darwin. With this I, and many like me, would happily 
> > > develop for *both* GNUstep and MacOSX, without any need to *hope* 
> > > that GNUstep will compile my sources.
> >
> > I'm sorry, but the problem, you're mentionning is not as big as you 
> > think. It's right, the runtimes are not compatibel, but
> >
> > 1. You shouldn't need to go down to the runtime anyway. This should 
> > really happen very, very rarely.
> > 2. GS already offers a lot of compatibility functions. Just use those 
> > functions and they will automagically compile on both platforms.
>
> You don't need to go down to the runtime, GNUstep does all that for 
> you.

So if you don't go down to the runtime, you don't need GS's core and 
gui on MOSX. Only the difference to Foundation and AppKit.


>  but GNUstep does NOT work between runtimes!

If you mean portable between runtimes, yes it is (with a recompile of 
course). If you don't want to build a parallel system on your MOSX.


> as long as you stick to the Foundation/AppKit, most things will 
> compile on Mac OS X

Exactly. And that should also be true for GS's tool set: If they stick 
to Foundation/AppKit, they should just compile and work on MOSX. 
Otherwise, they should correct that and not the rest should adapt to 
them, by needing to port glibobjc.


> You use "additions", I understand that. but that is USELESS if I want 
> to compile GNUstep-gui. Care to port GNUstep-gui to work on 
> apple-apple-gnu?

Why should I? gui is supposed to be AppKit. I don't need a second 
AppKit on my MOSX. What a mess would that be? Redundancy should always 
be eliminated and not created.
The problem is only there, where gui or MOSX AppKit didn't stick to the 
OpenStep reference. These cases have to be handled individually. 
Preferably, by correcting the source on the wrong side. If not 
possible, by implementing compatibility methods.


> So you'd rather have many mostly-working functions, than any working 
> ones?

Yes, take the example of GDL2: It's by far not complete. But I would be 
very sad, if it wouldn't be there. For me I had to contribute to it, 
but now it works flawlessly. If the original implementors would have 
said: "oh, no it's not complete so lets hide it", I would be missing 
something very valuable.
In my eyes, open-source works like that. Everybody complets and debugs, 
what he needs. As long as we are all walking in the same direction, 
this works well.


> 'm exaggerating,

Modestly said, yes!


> but please understand my point.

I'm sorry, but I think I didn't really get it.   :-(


> Thank you for your reply, but perhaps you should check your 
> information before you tell me to check mine.

Well, I'm probably the main contributor at the moment concerning GS on 
MOSX. Though, I do not use everything from GS. I use GS core (which 
boils of course down to Additions), GDL2, gsantlr and GSWeb.


Re
Phil