Re: Re[2]: NSString.m / stringWithoutPrefix: (was Re[2]: GSWeb probs.)

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On Wednesday, September 18, 2002, at 10:37 AM, Marcus Müller wrote:

> On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 16:46 Europe/Berlin, Manuel Guesdon wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:30:41 +0100 Richard Frith-Macdonald 
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > | I renamed it to stringByDeletingPrefix: to be consistent with the 
> > > naming
> > > | conventions of the NSString class.
> > > | However, I think these methods should probably be deprecated and 
> > > removed
> > > | entirely, as they are trivial to implement and I'd really like to 
> > > remove
> > > | as much non-standard stuff as we reasonably can.
> >
> > I globaly agree but may be we could move "GNUstep extensions" to a 
> > separated library instead of just removing these addons ?
>
> I'd also like to support this idea, although Richard - at least I 
> guess - meant to remove trivial extensions only.
> There are lots of extensions which cannot possibly be removed.

Yep ... there are some extensions which are necessary for support of old 
OPENSTEP API or are
needed for performance etc.

> A good start for preparing the move to a separate library would be to 
> move all extensions to 'Additions'.

That might not be possible ... but I agree it would at least be nice to 
move most of them, and certainly
any trivial ones.

> Some time ago I've started the GNUstep -> OS X migration framework 
> which allows for GNUstep programs (I had gsdoc in mind) to be compiled 
> and run under OS X. It would simplify the task of maintaining this 
> framework if all GNUstep Additions would be kept in one place.

As much as possible, I'd like to do that.  Actually, I want to support 
as few additions as we can get
away with.

> The extensions do not necessary need to be a library on GNUstep - it 
> would also not be possible to have them as a library because of 
> dependencies between 'base' and 'additions' I think. The only thing 
> which is necessary in my eyes is to have the Header files clearly 
> separated, so at least it seems the implementations of these 
> 'additions' is kept in a separate library. I just need to maintain the 
> same set of headers in my framework on OS X, making it unnecessary to 
> change code in i.e. gsdoc to compile it on OS X - at least in theory.

Well, I hope the Additions subproject in the base library will not 
depend on the base library itsself.
But that does require work to move any Base specific code that the 
Additions library uses into Additions
from Base.  The main problem I can see is that GNUstep supports many 
more character encodings than
MacOS-X ... so I think that should be moved ... it would be nice to 
figure out a way to let MacOS-X use
the additional encodings that GNUstep supports.