Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 25th Nov 2011 22:48 UTC
OpenStep, GNUstep "A little over one year after the 1.0 release, I'm happy to announce the 1.6 release of the GNUstep Objective-C runtime. This provides a superset of the functionality of Apple's Mac OS X 10.7/iOS 5 runtimes and provides a solid foundation for Objective-C and Objective-C++ development on Free Software platforms."
Order by: Score:
Comment by drcouzelis
by drcouzelis on Fri 25th Nov 2011 23:36 UTC
drcouzelis
Member since:
2010-01-11

I've never used any of the GNUStep / Cocoa API, but I really appreciate any work that furthers the option of using Objective-C on Linux. I used it to make one of my video games (Objective-C + Allegro) and it quickly became one of my favorite languages. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by drcouzelis
by Midar on Sat 26th Nov 2011 23:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by drcouzelis"
Midar Member since:
2011-11-26

Actually, this is exactly why I wrote my ObjC framework - I didn't want to be limited to OS X and write software using one framework that exists everywhere.

If you're interested, have a look at https://webkeks.org/objfw/. It's quite mature already, yet there's still to do and not many use it yet. Be sure to check out the development version, as the last release is quite outdated and a new release will come soon!

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by drcouzelis
by drcouzelis on Sun 27th Nov 2011 01:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by drcouzelis"
drcouzelis Member since:
2010-01-11

Very nice. I downloaded the documentation and checked it out.

How far do you plan on taking it? Will you be implementing any sort of GUI toolkit?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by drcouzelis
by Midar on Sun 27th Nov 2011 03:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by drcouzelis"
Midar Member since:
2011-11-26

The documentation on the homepage is of the quite old 0.5 release. Be sure to check out the developer version and type doxygen there to get an up-to-date documentation. It includes a lot of classes more now ;) .

As for the UI framework, the problem is that it's hard to have an abstraction for UIs that does look native anywhere - that's almost impossible, I guess. Maybe the better way is to just create bindings to common toolkits and have similar APIs so it's easy to port from one toolkit to another.

Reply Score: 1

The NextStep
by Hussein on Sat 26th Nov 2011 01:01 UTC
Hussein
Member since:
2008-11-22

People who want to run their Mac OS X on their own hardware should instead work on a Mac OS X clone. It seems that most of pieces needed to create such clone are freely available.

Reply Score: 1

RE: The NextStep
by bloodline on Sat 26th Nov 2011 07:50 UTC in reply to "The NextStep"
bloodline Member since:
2008-07-28

People who want to run their Mac OS X on their own hardware should instead work on a Mac OS X clone. It seems that most of pieces needed to create such clone are freely available.


Hmmm... I'm surprised there isn't a project like ReactOS... You are right the components are there... Though also some massive holes, and I dread to think about some hidden legal pitfalls...

Reply Score: 1

RE: The NextStep
by Kivada on Sat 26th Nov 2011 07:58 UTC in reply to "The NextStep"
Kivada Member since:
2010-07-07

We can't have a Mac Wine? I'd love to have Rosetta ported to Linux for all my old PPC software that wasn't made Universal Binary that I had collected before I ditched Apple hardware.

Why? My old G4 boxes are getting kind crusty and buying replacement parts for them is a hassle.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: The NextStep
by zima on Fri 2nd Dec 2011 23:47 UTC in reply to "RE: The NextStep"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

There's always PearPC... (or even SheepShaver, if those are just Mac OS Classic apps, still)

Yeah, nominally a bit slow method - but it shouldn't matter much with a software which essentially stands still, and with the continuing massive progress of (also per single core) CPU performance.

(and hey, you already own the OS / in sane jurisdictions one is perfectly entitled to run it "wherever" - as long as running only one copy at a time)

Reply Score: 2

RE: The NextStep
by henrikmk on Sat 26th Nov 2011 08:53 UTC in reply to "The NextStep"
henrikmk Member since:
2005-07-10

There is a GNUStep based desktop in the OSX style, called EtoiléOS, although it has not visibly moved for quite a while.

http://etoileos.com/

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: The NextStep
by Hypnos on Tue 29th Nov 2011 14:59 UTC in reply to "RE: The NextStep"
Hypnos Member since:
2008-11-19

The mailing lists are quite active -- a lot of work being done on the developer frameworks.

Reply Score: 2

Great news!
by moondevil on Sat 26th Nov 2011 08:59 UTC
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

Back in 1999 I had to port a rendering engine from Objective-C to C++.

At the time I really enjoyed Objective-C and the NeXT environment, but never managed to play around with it again.

Thanks to the FSF efforts it is easy to access Objective-C in another operating systems besides MacOS X.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by bloodline
by bloodline on Sat 26th Nov 2011 12:59 UTC
bloodline
Member since:
2008-07-28

There is a lot of animosity towards Obj-C, but I love it. There is a degree of maturity with the runtime that I've not found in other oop systems.

We are lucky GNUStep exists, otherwise MacOSX would be the only place it could be used!

Reply Score: 2

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Sat 26th Nov 2011 23:50 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Is there an alternative SDK which can allow compiling for iOS without being bound by their draconian developer agreement?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by shmerl
by Neolander on Sun 27th Nov 2011 12:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, even if you could, what would be the use since you can't distribute your software to normal people ?

Reply Score: 2