Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mintaka!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!petrilli From: petrilli@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli) Newsgroups: comp.lang.objective-c Subject: Re: Health of Stepstone and ObjC Message-ID: Date: 24 May 91 02:54:56 GMT References: <1991May23.075820.983@agate.berkeley.edu> <283C3D20.6BF7@deneva.sdd.trw.com> Sender: news@ai.mit.edu Organization: The Free Software Foundation Lines: 48 In-reply-to: thomsen@spf.trw.com's message of 23 May 91 22:07:28 GMT Mark R. Thomsen writes: Stepstone is not a critical component to NeXT in the sense a) NeXT only uses OC and not IC-Pak and b) NeXT liscences OC but did the critical parts of the compiler themselves (apparent from the trademarking). NeXT selected OC at the time because dynamic binding was there ... C++ was not there yet. However it looks like C++ could become the 'native language' easily for NeXT. I really should clarify this... In my discussions with NeXT, which concerned Objective-C in GNU C, I was told that teh object libraries, in general, belong to StepStone (appologies to NeXT if this is incorrect interpretation), as I was told that the FSF would have to recreate them since NeXT didn't own them. As for C++ becomming the 'default' language for NeXTs, don't hold your breath. For reasons that are more complex, C++ is technically incapable of supporting the NeXT fully. The machine is designed for the message passing architecture of Objective-C (which is similar to Flavors under LMI Lisp). After discussing C++ v. Objective-C with people, I think NeXT supports it grudgingly, and I know the programmers at NeXT despise it, as do I. Coming from an OOP background before OOP was the 'buzzword' that it is. (I started with Flavors and Lisp), I do not like C++, as it missis most of the spirit of the idea of OOP. (Please, do not continue this discussion of C++ v. O-C, as it doesn't belong here). Afterall, they are selling NeXT computers and not Objective-C computers. True, but Objective-C is the HEART of NextStep, which is what really DEFINES a NeXT. A NeXT would be just another pretty face if it wasn't for NextStep. NextStep and Interface Builder cannot exist (in anything resembling thier current state) under C++. Personally I would hate to see OC and Stepstone go under. My people really prefer OC to C++, and so do I. Stepstone was good to work with when we used their products on Sun, and the product worked well. This is the concensus of REAL OOP people... peolpe who come from Lisp and SmallTalk backgrounds, rather than moving to C++ from C or Pascal. Chris -- | Chris Petrilli | petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu | I don't even speak for myself.