Very Computer

> Sorry if this is obvious (but I didn't find it in the
> FAQ): Is there any documentation out there on how to
> use the GNU ObjC collection library (except the
> unfinished one by R. A. McCallum I keep finding
> everywhere on the web...)?

> I mean, I can find a lot of information on the language
> and even some on the collection API, but I'm unable to
> find simple info like, what do I #include (or #import) to
> use the collections in gcc?

> Pointers to man pages, info files, or whatever, would
> be greatly appreciated.

> > Take a look at the GNU foundation kit from GNUStep.  www.gnustep.org

> Don't do this.

> The GNU foundation kit is *incompatible* with the GNU collection classes.

> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world of
> difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

>> Take a look at the GNU foundation kit from GNUStep.  www.gnustep.org

> Don't do this.

> The GNU foundation kit is *incompatible* with the GNU collection classes.

> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world of
> difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

>>> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world of
>>> difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

>>    No, the "GNUStep FoundationKit" includes "GNUstep Base Library",
>> which is the newer name for the "Objective C Class Library".

>  Well, it's not by changing names that the quality improves.

>  The Foundation Kit which is supposed to replace the nice, good old,
> Smalltalk style classes (OrderedCollection, Set etc.) is completely
> different from the Collection classes that the question was about.

>  The GNU Foundation Kit documentation is therefore very bad reading if
> you want to learn about classical Objective-C class libraries.

> > Take a look at the GNU foundation kit from GNUStep.  www.gnustep.org

> Don't do this.

> The GNU foundation kit is *incompatible* with the GNU collection classes.

> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world of
> difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

> >> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world of
> >> difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

> >    No, the "GNUStep FoundationKit" includes "GNUstep Base Library",
> > which is the newer name for the "Objective C Class Library".

>  Well, it's not by changing names that the quality improves.

>  The Foundation Kit which is supposed to replace the nice, good old,
> Smalltalk style classes (OrderedCollection, Set etc.) is completely
> different from the Collection classes that the question was about.

>> >> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world
>> >> of difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

>> >    No, the "GNUStep FoundationKit" includes "GNUstep Base Library",
>> > which is the newer name for the "Objective C Class Library".

>>  Well, it's not by changing names that the quality improves.

>>  The Foundation Kit which is supposed to replace the nice, good old,
>> Smalltalk style classes (OrderedCollection, Set etc.) is completely
>> different from the Collection classes that the question was about.

>     You don't understand, the FoundationKit *includes* all of the
> Smalltalk-style classes (Set, et al.). Again, you show that you have no
> idea about what you are saying. Every single time you open your mouth,
> you appear to loose several IQ points.

> >> >> The latter subclass Object and the former NSObject, which is a world
> >> >> of difference (the memory management is different to begin with).

> >> >    No, the "GNUStep FoundationKit" includes "GNUstep Base Library",
> >> > which is the newer name for the "Objective C Class Library".

> >>  Well, it's not by changing names that the quality improves.

> >>  The Foundation Kit which is supposed to replace the nice, good old,
> >> Smalltalk style classes (OrderedCollection, Set etc.) is completely
> >> different from the Collection classes that the question was about.

> >     You don't understand, the FoundationKit *includes* all of the
> > Smalltalk-style classes (Set, et al.). Again, you show that you have no
> > idea about what you are saying. Every single time you open your mouth,
> > you appear to loose several IQ points.

> Can he be below ZERO?

> >     You don't understand, the FoundationKit *includes* all of the
> > Smalltalk-style classes (Set, et al.). Again, you show that you have no
> > idea about what you are saying. Every single time you open your mouth,
> > you appear to loose several IQ points.

> Right. So the "standard" classes are available -- good. (I'm a bit
> disappointed that they're not a part of gcc, but that's life.)