Thread overview | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
July 26, 2004 D vs Objective C? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
How does D (hold up to/compare with) Objective C? |
July 27, 2004 Re: D vs Objective C? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert Jones | >How does D (hold up to/compare with) Objective C?
You can't compare them.
Objective C is very different from D. There is a language called Objective C++, which is just a mix of C++ and Objective C. This is possible and usefull as Objective C's class system is so different from that of C++.
You don'thave things like the message eating nil, or any that dynamic thing in D.
|
July 27, 2004 OT: Re: D vs Objective C? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matthias Becker | "message eating nil" that sounds like something you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley. something i wondered - is objective C a true extension to the compiler or is it just a fancy preprocessor? i wonder because the syntax is so weird, and it would make sense if it were weird for easy preprocessing. |
July 28, 2004 Re: OT: Re: D vs Objective C? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jarrett Billingsley | >"message eating nil" > >that sounds like something you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley. Well, nil is something like null. But if you call a message on it, the result is just nil rather than an exception. So you don't need stuff like the null object pattern. >something i wondered - is objective C a true extension to the compiler or is it just a fancy preprocessor? i wonder because the syntax is so weird, and it would make sense if it were weird for easy preprocessing. I'm not sure. Perhaps at first it was just a preprocessor. The first C++ compilers just compiled to C, too. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation