Check out Jerry's new videos -- REV to ObjC -> iPhone

Randall Reetz randall at randallreetz.com
Mon May 10 00:07:40 CDT 2010


In so many ways, Apple has done everyone a favor.  I know, I know.  Hear me out.

1. Objective C is the industry standard, and has the best compilers, it has become the rosetta stone of computer languages.  Only ANSI C is more standard and it is targeted directly to hardware (where objects really don't apply).
2. The world is going to have to build towards a standard eventually that will allow machine discoverable logic.  This is a salvo in that direction.
3. Its not exactly like they choose xtalk or some esoteric proprietary or Apple specific language.  Objective C is open, well documented, universally known, etc.
4. It benefits everyone in computing to begin to separate logic into appropriate layers that transits smoothly from general concept, to white board sketch, to paper prototype, to interpreted scripting, to compiled code.
5. xTalk and RunRev are ideally suited to shine in the real time interpreted scripting strata.
6. By translating xtalk stacks to C source, RunRev would open many many devises and platforms to xtalk users.
7. Done right, RunRev could license this translation tech to other language and IDE purveyors (Adobe, other xTalk IDE's, etc.) who would like to widen the reach of their product.
8. RunRev customers could use this to learn Objective C.
9. Would provide a ramp from stacks to professional development and deployment.
10. RunRev users could take advantage of the best compilers written specific to many different platforms.
11. RunRev users wouldn't have to shrink away from clients that ask "isn't xtalk just a hobbyist's computer language?"
12. RunRev would have a tendency to evolve at the speed of the marketplace as it's product is bound to a larger market at a deeper level.

Randall


On May 9, 2010, at 9:24 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:

> And why would they?  What is apples motivation?  Is it to piss everyone off?  Is it to appear anti-competitive?  Is it to kill innovation?  Is it a vendetta against xtalk or other programming languages?
> 
> Look at it this way...  Lets say a some terrorists take out the world trade centers with commercial jets.  You know they are all middle eastern.  Do you stop all middle eastern looking people from traveling?  Well you would have to if you didn't have scanners.  With scanners you can bypass a person's appearance and only hassle those holding weapons.  By having access to source in one language, apple can scan apps to insure safety and other apple specific interests and still allow everyone to "free to move about the airplane".
> 
> Randall
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Yennie <briany at qldlearning.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 7:40 PM
> To: How to use Revolution <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
> Subject: Re: Check out Jerry's new videos -- REV to ObjC -> iPhone
> 
> Josh,
> 
> Except, if a tool like Rev were generating the code to paste in, it would inevitably contain large portions of identical code across projects. Apple could easily ban any app that matches those very clear signatures.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On May 8, 2010, at 11:28 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque at hyperactivesw.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Ruslan Zasukhin wrote:
>>> 
>>>> RevMobile before it seems was going generate c# sources?
>>>> Strange choice as for me.
>>>> Main engine should go to C,
>>>> Some parts of REV project also to C
>>>> And GUI part of REV project to ObjC - Cocoa.
>>> 
>>> This is forbidden by the new license. There can be no translations. All work must be created originally by Apple-specified tools.
>> 
>> Of course, if you pasted the C code into Xcode and built your app there, there would be no way Apple could tell the code was not written in Xcode. Text is text.
>> 
>> I've compared Revtalk and C a little bit and there are some code structures that are so similar translation would be easy (if then, switch). Chunk expressions are an example of something that would not translate, so there would have to be a special set of handlers that split strings and returned items, and in Revtalk you'd need to call these functions rather than using the stock ones to make the C output feasible.
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 




More information about the use-livecode mailing list