[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[gnuspeech-contact] Re: cvs
From: |
Gregory John Casamento |
Subject: |
[gnuspeech-contact] Re: cvs |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:36:37 -0700 (PDT) |
All,
Since we're discussing changes that should be made to the current source, I
would like to suggest that we restructure how the code is built.
A lot of code seems to be shared between the tube model and other parts of
GNUspeech in a somewhat non-conventional way using Xcode's ability to include
code from any directory (not just the project directory). I propose, instead,
that we examine what the comment portions of the application are and pull them
out into a framework that all of the apps can link against.
This is a much more logical structure as it:
1) Makes GNUspeech's core code reusable by applications outside of those in
GNUspeech
2) Is a more conventional way of structuring the code
3) Makes it easier to build on GNUstep.
Later, GJC
--
Gregory Casamento
----- Original Message ----
From: David Hill <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Cc: Greg Casamento <address@hidden>; Steve Nygard <address@hidden>; gnuspeech
<address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 11:47:19 PM
Subject: Re: cvs
Hi Eric,
You need to coordinate with Greg Casamento and Steve Nygard. Adam
Fedor did a lot of work originally to change the NeXT code to
OpenStep/Cocoa and Greg is working on the GNUStep port. At the very
least, if you are making big changes, you probably ought to work on a
split and merge later when it can be shown that you haven't caused
problems.
In response to you latest comment that this ought to be posted to the
list -- yes. I should have thought of that. I'll post them and then
post this.
Live long and prosper!
david
On Oct 15, 2006, at 8:32 PM, address@hidden wrote:
> Oh, one more thing. The way I am doing the port to OS X may be more
> 'invasive' than what you had in mind. As I am going through the
> source code, I am essentially changing everything that is done in a
> C/C++ style (such as the use of C strings, const char * , etc.) and
> changing them to use the equivalent Objective-C classes (e.g.
> NSString). Also, there are places that use data structures such as
> an NXHashtable which in the OS X world is a "core foundation" class
> (CFHashtable or some such), which is part of Carbon. While these
> core foundation classes would work fine in Cocoa as well, I am
> changing these to use the equivalent Cocoa Objective-C class (such
> as NSDictionary); essentially I am taking a pure Cocoa approach.
>
> Furthermore, none of the NEXTstep Objective-C code will work as-is
> in Cocoa. On the most basic level, at least the NX prefixes on all
> the Objective-C classes have to be changed to NS prefixes.
>
> Here is my concern, however: while all this is a good way to port
> the application to a native Cocoa application, and is a good way
> for me to learn all about Cocoa on OS X, I have no idea what the
> implications to this are for the port to GNUstep.
>
> Eric
>
[snip]