Hello Greg, thank you for your response.
I assume that those odd names: objc_property_t, _strong, _weak instead
of Property, strong, weak have been chosen in order to avoid conflicts
with the symbols in existing source code.
As far as I concerned, I prefer the introduction of regular names with
a compiler flag for Objective-C 2.0 features disable by default.
Specifically, those strange names remind me to the Windows API.
On 2008-01-02 01:26:42 +0100, Greg Parker <gparker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> ActiveMan <basurero@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>> Hello, there is a mismatch between "The Objective-C 2.0 Runtime
Reference"
>> (Last updated: 2007-05-25) and "The objective-C 2.0 Programming
Language"
>> (Last updated: 2007-12-11) with regards to the types and runtime
functions
>> used to store introspection metadata of the properties.
>>
>> For instance, in reference to the type used to represent properties
they
>> respectively talk about objc_property_t type vs the Property type. Also
>> there are differences in runtime functions like respectively
>> property_getAttributes() vs property_getInfo().
>>
>> Unfortunately at time of writing this message my OS X 10.5 installation
>> only provides the objc_property_t type in the "objc/runtime.h" header
>> file.
>
> The Property type does not exist; objc_property_t is the correct name.
> For other details, the header file is authoritative and the
do***entation
> that best matches it is probably correct.
>
>
>> Is there any expectation about a new version of the Developer Tools
that
>> includes the runtime described in "The Objective-C 2.0 Runtime
Reference",
>> or is "The Objective-C 2.0 Runtime Reference" information incorrect or
>> obsolete?
>
> File a bug re****t at http://bugre****t.apple.com
. Incorrect
do***entation
> is handled through the same bug database as everything else.
|
