[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Keyed Archiving and MOSX compatibility...

From: Gregory John Casamento
Subject: Re: Keyed Archiving and MOSX compatibility...
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:49:32 -0800 (PST)


--- Fred Kiefer <address@hidden> wrote:
> Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> > I believe that the current effort to make keyed archiving might cause
> massive
> > changes in the way .gorm's are loaded, particularly with internals of
> certain
> > classes as well as the custom class templates.
> > 
> > While, I believe our template system is similar, it is not the same as the
> one
> > on MOSX and it is, in some ways, better.   We need to make certain that
> these
> > classes are minimally impacted by this change.
> > 
> Could you explain a bit, what the principle difference between the two is?

Well, first, let's start with the obvious.  Since they were independently
developed (obviously) they have different class names, different class
hierarchy, different members.  Also .nib files generally use something called a
NSDataObject to hold some information for custom classes whereas in .gorms this
is part of the encoded parent-class object held within the template which is
transformed into an instance of it's subclass.  

Both approaches achieve the same effect.  GNUstep's way is more efficient since
the values don't need to be mapped back into the object but can be unarchived
direcly into the resultant custom instance.  

> > My intent when I suggested that we implement keyed archiving was to be able
> to
> > get XML output for .gorm files, whether that was MOSX compatible or not.
> > 
> > I beleive it is well worth the effort to try to make GNUstep and MOSX
> > compatible in this way, but I also believe that we shouldn't massively
> impact
> > current functionality to make it happen.
> > 
> I would also like to see this happen. My feeling is that an XML format 
> is only worthwhile, when it is compatible to MacOSX. The only other 
> useful attempt would be to to get the Renaissance format working :-)

I don't see Renaissance as the answer due to it's tag-based mentality.   An XML
format (MOSX compatible or not) is the answer here.   What worries me about
MOSX compatibility is the fact that it is going to be a moving target (although
I'm not averse to trying).   

Barring MOSX compatibility, a library to load GNUstep keyed archives on MOSX
(only because of the member variable diffs between the two) is also possible so
that we control the format.


Gregory John Casamento -- CEO/President Open Logic Corp.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]