tumult

43 ms·

421.
by tumult 17y ago
And NSPR is written in C as a thin layer over the OS APIs. Just because it's C doesn't magically imbue whatever uses it with super-awesome-native qualities.
422.
by tumult 17y ago
No, if anything, Firefox is proof that you can write a bad 'native application' in C directly with the APIs provided by the OS. It's entirely possible to write something that is more native than Firefox but is based on another language, lik
423.
by tumult 17y ago
Jobs' second response is the most interesting. We’ve been there before, and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform. So it seems, at least f
424.
by tumult 17y ago
Before, it was just interpreters that could load in external code, i.e. user input or the internet. Now, they are all banned.
425.
by tumult 17y ago
You are wrong, selective enforcement is evil.
426.
by tumult 17y ago
How am I supposed to catch up with them if they already are allowed to use features and languages and thought processes that I'm not? It makes no sense.
427.
by tumult 17y ago
No, Apply will just selectively turn a blind eye when it's convenient for them, and arbitrarily apply the restriction in other cases. Evil.
428.
by tumult 17y ago
Those are both less restrictive than telling you how to think and how to behave. Nintendo's is dumb, Apple's is evil.
429.
by tumult 17y ago
This is a mistaken claim. Naughty Dog, for example, uses a precompilation phase in their games involving Lisp that builds into machine and graphics code. Most games, too, have a dynamic runtime in the form of a customized scripting engine i
430.
by tumult 17y ago
Not really a consideration. Bison, YACC, etc. are clearly banned.
431.
by tumult 17y ago
Wrong. Nintendo doesn't tell you what language to think in. Neither does MS, or even Sony. This is way, way worse. I hope it's just a blunder on Apple's part, and the clause is quickly revised.
432.
by tumult 17y ago
The elves will leave Middle Earth, and they will truly be left with nothing but fart apps. They need to fix this clause, fast.
433.
by tumult 17y ago
People are mad because it's clear Apple has something good going here with their mobile platforms, but they're blowing it for all of us now, including themselves.
434.
by tumult 17y ago
Wrong analogy. It's more like a distributer (not label) telling its affiliates that for their CDs to be shipped, the songs on them must now have been originally written only in Mixolydian mode in the key of G with a 4/4 time signature. Anyt
435.
by tumult 17y ago
I've written an Objective-C compiler and runtime myself, so I think I am familiar with its limitations. Monkey patching is a terrible idea and you should avoid ever seeing that stuff in production. Objective-C is 'flexible' but dangerous in
436.
by tumult 17y ago
You're missing the point. This bans everything that isn't direct Objective-C, C, or C++. Not just ActionScript or C# or whatever. Everything.
437.
by tumult 17y ago
If you don't want to, you can just ignore my comment.
438.
by tumult 17y ago
Do you think you could have ported a non-trivial game with Objective-C? How about something like Braid, which is slightly less straightforward?
439.
by tumult 17y ago
Citations: Quartz 2D: Read Apple's library docs or headers. Publicly available. No other devs have stepped up to question this claim. Dead obvious if you use it. My own apps: I'm not obligated to tell you. If that pisses you off, sorry, the
440.
by tumult 17y ago
Yes.
441.
by tumult 17y ago
Quartz 2D is Apple's C-based graphics drawing framework, mentioning that is irrelevant here. Quartz 2D is written in the C preprocessor language, not primarily C. To use it, you mostly use C preprocessor directives, not C. It's then tra
442.
by tumult 17y ago
They already did. Now they get to choose when to apply it, arbitrarily.
443.
by tumult 17y ago
There is probably no good technical way for them to counter your claim that you wrote it, but you would be lying, and you agreed to their contract+license which says you won't do it.
444.
by tumult 17y ago
Easy is not always powerful or expressive.
445.
by tumult 17y ago
Read again -- it says you must write the application, originally, in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript.
446.
by tumult 17y ago
You're right, but I had already removed that paragraph before you commented.
447.
by tumult 17y ago
Anything with a parser. Anything that uses Quartz 2D (a drawing library that uses the C preprocessor, in Cocoa/UIKit.) Anything with C preprocessor macros above a certain unknown threshold (hey, Objective-C was originally just a bunch of m
448.
by tumult 17y ago
Yeah, but you agreed to a contract, and their license, which says not to do it.
449.
by tumult 17y ago
Gruber gets this mostly right, especially about vendor lock-in and abstracting on top of the platform as a whole (i.e. multiplatform, write-once apps.) Where he gets it wrong is here: IPHONE DEVELOPERS: No change. If you’re a developer and
450.
Why Apple Changed Section 3.3.1(daringfireball.net)
99 points by tumult 17y ago|104 comments

More ›