I'm in class right now, where I'm bein lerned an introduction to ObjC.
I haven't gotten too far, but this shit looks mad verbose right now, and I'm not sure how I'm feeling about the syntax. (But then again, we are just getting started.)
I don't often see ObjC on the boards. What's your take on it, riders?
Too little syntax, too little documentation, too much typing. Method calls slow as fuck. Numerous holes in the standard library that are difficult to work around due to lousy documentation.
>>3 Garbage collection optional.
Yes this is good; I'm not opposed to garbage collection, but this class in particular is focused on mobile development so I imagine that we won't be using garbage collection at all.
Too little syntax
Really? It doesn't seem that way to me. I'm sure you have more complex problems in mind, but so far I'm surprised that the syntax for method calls is entirely different from the syntax for function calls. And we haven't even started building classes yet….
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-24 17:05
>>3 Too little syntax
How is that possible? Haskell programmer detected.
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-24 19:14
As a Smalltalker, I have a raging hard-on for ObjC.
Too bad it's lacking Morphic.
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-24 20:44
>>1
The verbose method calls are bearable with the IDE autocompletion/automatically adding '['s. Properties help too.
>>8
I think you are ly9ng, Xcode autocompletion is a CHAR
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-25 0:20
>>8
The naming scheme makes it far more bearable - it's like T/Scheme where things are built of lexemes compared to the insanity that is CL - i.e. "setFoo:" "foo" "drawWindow:withHandle:" to "set-foo!" "foo" "draw-window #:handle"
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-25 1:35
slow_as_fuckist here:
I haven't really spent much time with obj-c.
I appreciate that it's a compiled superset of c that gives you a smalltalk style object system.
however.
i can't get over the fucking syntax. it's just so weird and (imo) pig disgusting. what's wrong with dots for method calls again? what's up with the brackets?
the NSFoo clutter in all the cocoa classes bugs me too. i just picture SJ fappin at a next cube.
>>9
I've used XCode for years. The editor used to be terrible, but sometime in the recent past it's stopped sucking completely. I find the new mini-documentation window to be useless, though. >>10
I like it for long method calls but having
setObjectAtIndex: and objectForKey: appear a million times is just annoying.
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-25 4:30
>>15
I prefer orthogonality like this to overloading.
>>11 i can't get over the fucking syntax. it's just so weird and (imo) pig disgusting. what's wrong with dots for method calls again? what's up with the brackets?
What's wrong with using empty brackets to signify the case where a function is called with no arguments? What's wrong with having the conditional before the consequent? I actually find it quite amusing that a rubyist of all people is complaining about another languages syntax, as Ruby is a complete mess. [/flame]
-- This message should in no way be considered an endorsement of Objective C --
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-25 8:00
>>18 Doesn't know that every post on prague implicitly supports Lisps
>>27
No, I don't agree. I deem ">implying" not to be that specific to the imageboards. Maybe they invented it, but that doesn't mean it's theirs. I'd rather complain about the incredibly low quality of their posts and the visibly very low to no mental effort put in them. Simply unbelievable!Unless it's some clever troll
>>28
I think that people get involved in the ">implying" nonsense for the sheer absurdity of it. It can be quite amusing when the chain gets rather large. The jury is out on whether the person who starts it is looking for the chain reaction or is just intellectually lazy.
Name:
Anonymous2010-03-25 18:44
>>30 '>implying that inference doesn't often require a certain level of wit and vinegar
>>36 perl -pi -e s/your/dick is better, as it doesn't require find and xargs (which will break when encountering files with spaces or special characters, among other stupid behavior). Plus then you get the added benefit of having every bit of perl's functionality, particularly a sane, familiar RE syntax instead sed's broken, backward, archaic quoting and escaping rules.
In any case, a real refactoring tool is much preferable because then you don't accidentally fuck up strings and other unrelated code that just happened to match a regex that turned out to be a bit too general.