From: Miro Jurisic (macdev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-25 02:52:24
In article <085201c48a75$c161b7f0$a901000a_at_mat>,
"Mathew Robertson" <mathew.robertson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Unless I missed completely missed something about OSX, you would preferably
> code it in Objective-C (which is a fantastic language for creating GUI's).
> In which case, GUI's for most other platforms are coded in C, C++, Delphi,
> VB, etc. wouldn't have a place on OSX.
Apple has two first-class APIs to the OS. One is C, one is Objective-C. The C
APIs can (obviously) be directly called from C++.
> Is the prefered language to program GUI's on OSX, C++?
No. C or Objective-C. The C APIs and the Objective-C APIs are approximately
equipotent.
> > The quality of the user interface of all of those applications is something
> > that I, as a professional Mac developer, would be ashamed to ship. (They
> > are not all equally bad, though.)
>
> you highlighted my point exactly - they are bad, compared to native
> applications, because it is _really hard_ to make a cross-platform GUI
> library. They are good, particularily considering this fact.
Really hard, yes. Really important, too, if you want to ship a product that
doesn't suck.
> > I firmly believe that the problem of producing a cross-platform framework
> > that
> > is able to accommodate the user experience demands of several platforms is
> > difficult and tractable.
>
> tractable => "Easily managed or controlled; governable" (dictionary.com)
>
> is the problem "difficult" or "easy"? (my guess that you have miss-type the
> last bit of the sentence - although I'm not sure which way it was meant...)
Ah, it would appear that I was not using "tractable" properly. Thanks for the
correction. What I meant it "possible to solve given a sufficiently capable and
motivated group of engineers". I believe the problem is hard, but not without a
solution. I also think that there's a partial solution that is considerably
simpler, and that's what people seem to be shipping today.
meeroh