Re: Extensions vs categories

> On 2007-12-27 23:31:52 +0100, Michael Ash <mike@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> 
> > ActiveMan <basurero@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Hello, thank you both.
> >> 
> >> There is a lot of do***entation about properties, garbage collection
> >> and fast enumerations as new features of Objective-C 2.0, but
> >> extensions has been missed.
> > 
> > I don't see how. It's very clearly described in the standard reference
for
> > the language. The fact that the description is short is simply due to
the
> > fact that extensions are a very small and simple addition to the
language
> > which doesn't warrant a great deal of discussion.

In article <fl31mn$uft$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, ActiveMan <basurero@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
wrote:

> AFAIK they don't mention anywhere that extensions is a new feature. In 
> fact when you compile a source file with Xcode using as target Mac OS X 
> 10.4 there is no warnings when you make a extension. However there 
> appears a warning when you use a @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 do not see how that could be an argument against it being a new 
feature. I haven't completely checked this, but to me, the phrase that 
"Class extensions are like ³anonymous² categories" 
(<http://developer.apple.com/do***entation/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/Ar
ticles/chapter_4_section_5.html>) makes me think that extensions are 
purely syntactic sugar.
 
<http://developer.apple.com/do***entation/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/Art
icles/chapter_5_section_8.html> and 
<http://developer.apple.com/do***entation/Cocoa/Reference/ObjCRuntimeRef/
Reference/reference.html#//apple_ref/c/func/class_getProperty> on the 
other hand, indicate that properties require runtime sup****t, which 10.4 
does not have.

Reinder