>>9
Of course in either language the only sane and portable way to call a member function if from a wrapper, but it's certainly convenient to be able to cast to a function type with void * as the first arg (i.e. this) on supporting systems.
This is dumb, the only compiler that supports this is the one from digital mars. On most systems with most compilers, a member function pointer is actually larger than sizeof(void*).
You should *always* write a C wrapper to interface with C code. C code, therefore C wrapper. There are plenty of worse things to complain about.
>>13
Well, of course it does. One line to get the funcion, one line to call the function. Why would you want less?
Haha I fucking lol'd, you've obviously never written a function that uses a selector as a callback (especially if it takes several arguments). We have helpers to call selector functions and they're a good 10 lines of code each.
>>14
Because id has properties that void * doesn't (and shouldn't) have.
That's fair, except it conflicts with your earlier comment:
Because then id would be just like void, and that would make even less sense.
id is not just like void; it's a struct containing the isa class. So why wasn't it defined as a non-pointer type? No other Objective-C class name has the pointer type in it; you declare NSString*, NSArray*, etc.
>>15
I keep hearing this argument and I hate it so much. Any problems with the language are just waved away as problems with the libraries, except that the libraries are the de-facto fucking standard for the language. How can you write Objective-C apps without using NSString? How the fuck do you avoid autorelease pools when all your basic libraries use them? Your argument is a bullshit fucking cop-out.
And no, it's not fucking garbage collected on iPhone.