On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 13:44, David Chisnall
<address@hidden> wrote:
On 28 Jan 2012, at 12:34, Ivan Vučica wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Amr has used some Objective-C 2.0 features in QuartzCore, such as @property. What's the status on use of 2.0 in extra libraries in GNUstep? Should I work on changing all that to manually implemented methods?
The decision at FOSDEM last year was that UIKit can use Objective-C 2 features, as there is no legacy Objective-C 1 code that uses UIKit, so anyone wanting to use UIKit is already restricted to an Objective-C 2 compiler.
All of these features have been working with Clang and the GNUstep runtime for a while, and they should also work with GCC 4.6.
This is coreanimation/quartzcore, which might end up being used in -gui :-)
> Also, I feel more comfortable using my own coding style when it comes to indentation and stuff like that. For libraries where I feel I might be doing major contributions, can I use my own coding style, or am I absolutely required to use the GNU coding style?
More difficult to say. The runtime uses the Étoilé coding conventions, which are actually sane, but for any contribution to base or gui I try to stick to writing obfuscated code^W^W^Wfollowing the GNU coding conventions.
The most important thing is consistency within a project, so if the library already uses one set of coding conventions then it's best to follow it, rather than mix and match.
I agree. But I feel Core Animation/QuartzCore and UIKit are separate libraries from -base, -gui, et al, so am I right to conclude I can use my style? :-)