GNU Collections Question

GNU Collections Question

Post by Magnus Lie Hetlan » Tue, 04 Sep 2001 11:04:19



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.

--

  Magnus Lie Hetland         http://www.veryComputer.com/

 "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
  it, doesn't go away."           -- Philip K.*

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by John C. Randolp » Tue, 04 Sep 2001 17:13:09



> 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

-jcr

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by David Ste » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 01:32:01



Quote:

> 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).

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Clark S. Cox I » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 01:45:39




> > 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).

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

--
Clark S. Cox III

http://www.whereismyhead.com/clark/

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Mathieu Chouinar » Wed, 05 Sep 2001 20:02:39




>> 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).

not again
 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by David Ste » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 02:57:53



Quote:

>> 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.

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Mathieu Chouinar » Wed, 05 Sep 2001 21:14:36




>>> 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.

I'm becoming tired of this
 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by John C. Randolp » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 06:07:50




> > 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).

Pay no attention to this idiot.  

-jcr

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Clark S. Cox I » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 07:48:50




> >> 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.

--
Clark S. Cox III

http://www.whereismyhead.com/clark/

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Mathieu Chouinar » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 01:59:36





>> >> 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?
 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Clark S. Cox I » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 08:28:19






> >> >> 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?

    Well, if anyone can, it would be he.

--
Clark S. Cox III

http://www.whereismyhead.com/clark/

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Magnus Lie Hetlan » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 21:33:59



[...]

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

Actually I had wished for the classical ones, yes... But I was
assuming they were part of the gcc dist (which I thought they
ought to be). Since it seems they aren't I'm not so sure anymore...

--

  Magnus Lie Hetland         http://www.veryComputer.com/

 "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
  it, doesn't go away."           -- Philip K.*

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Magnus Lie Hetlan » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 21:35:30




[snip]

Quote:>     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.)

Quote:> --
> Clark S. Cox III

--

  Magnus Lie Hetland         http://www.veryComputer.com/

 "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
  it, doesn't go away."           -- Philip K.*

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Magnus Lie Hetlan » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 21:41:08







> [snip]

> >     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.)

Another thing: If I only want the collections (or the Foundation
libraries), do I have to download the entire GNUstep Core, which seems
to include lots of other stuff which is completely uninteresting to
me (and which seems to have several prerequisite libraries etc.)?

Quote:> > --
> > Clark S. Cox III

--

  Magnus Lie Hetland         http://www.veryComputer.com/

 "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
  it, doesn't go away."           -- Philip K.*

 
 
 

GNU Collections Question

Post by Magnus Lie Hetlan » Thu, 06 Sep 2001 21:42:36




Quote:> Another thing: If I only want the collections (or the Foundation
> libraries), do I have to download the entire GNUstep Core, which seems
> to include lots of other stuff which is completely uninteresting to
> me (and which seems to have several prerequisite libraries etc.)?

Uhrm... Sorry about my rash posting. I have now downloaded gnustep-base :)

--

  Magnus Lie Hetland         http://www.veryComputer.com/

 "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
  it, doesn't go away."           -- Philip K.*