3 ms·
The frameworks themselves sometimes impose verbosity, changing syntax used to work with them isn't going to do anything about that. I've seen quite a few examp
by mrsteveman1 14y ago
The frameworks themselves sometimes impose verbosity, changing syntax used to work with them isn't going to do anything about that.
I've seen quite a few examples since yesterday where the code given was not fewer in line count or even easier to read (partly subjective), but was simply more approachable and familiar to people who are already set on writing Ruby instead of ObjC.
If you know ruby very well you may get a head start here without having to learn ObjC (yet, i'll be shocked if you dont hit walls with this plan), but the mountain of work for you is learning the frameworks, and learning them without the benefit of 90% of the examples and help available specifically for ObjC.
And what of working with the parts of Apple's platforms that aren't Objective-C in the first place, like all the CoreFoundation stuff which is C. At some point you're going to hit walls that could be easily solved by dashing your code with a few lines of C or dropping in an example you found on stackoverflow, but now you've got to come up with the Ruby equivalent and you're actually juggling a new set of issues whether it seems that way or not. Maybe the time you save writing most of an App in ruby makes up for it, but I'd be surprised if thats the case in practice.