Re: Re[6]: EOKeyValueCoding

[Philippe C.D. Robert]

On Sun, 24 Feb 2002 21:04:31 +0100 (CET)
Manuel Guesdon <address@hidden> wrote:
>  >| >> | This isn't an issue any more. We should place a KVC implementation in
>  >| >> | FoundationExt if we want to support deprecated OS's like OPENSTEP.
>  >| >> | Indeed because KVC is part of Foundation it's much easier now, since 
>  >| >> you
>  >| >> | don't need to maintain runtime specific code in GDL :-)
>  >| >
>  >| > I agree :-) on the last sentence but in this case, why putting "base 
>  >| > KVC" in FoundationExt an not base  ?
>  >| 
>  >| As I wrote, to support old Foundations which do *not* have KVC in 
>  >| Foundation (like the Foundation of OPENSTEP). I would *copy* the code 
>  >| over to FoundationExt (so it's contained in both libraries).
> 
> You're right. I've forgotten this one.

IMHO this would be a bad move from our side. Of course old code should be
supported whenever possible, but much, much more important is IMHO to be and
remain compatible with Cocoa/Apple. We have to be very careful not to introduce
incompatibilities on basic stuff like that. 

BTW who actually has FoundationExt installed who does not really use GDL?
 
-Phil
-- 
Philippe C.D. Robert
Software Engineer
Silicon Graphics, Inc.