[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GNUstep-Base and GNUstep-GUI: Frameworks, anyone?

From: Nicola Pero
Subject: Re: GNUstep-Base and GNUstep-GUI: Frameworks, anyone?
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:32:50 +0100 (BST)

> Is there any particular reason why GNUstep-Base and GNUstep-GUI aren't 
> built as frameworks?

In the case of gnustep-base, simplicity / portability.  When you port to a
new platform, you have to port libraries first and frameworks later.  So
if gnustep-base is compiled as a library, it always works out of the box
as soon as you have the first step of having libraries / tools (/ bundles)

Also, gnustep-base itself is required to build and load a framework
properly.  Yes, we could add more hacks to break the loop and make that
special case work, but is it worth the additional complication ?

I don't like complications in the building process because when they don't
work on weird configurations (just to name a few, weird windows and apple
builds) someone has to figure out why they don't work. :-)

gnustep-gui might be a better target for frameworkization as some of those
issues are not present.

Btw, I don't think the difference between libraries and frameworks is that
relevant -- it's mostly vapourware in the current implementation (eg, you
can't just take a framework directory and drop it on a directory and hope
to have it working, so frameworks are not really self-contained), the main
difference being that frameworks support somewhat resource versioning, but
frameworks are also lot more difficult to port to different platforms and
have them work there.

reply via email to

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