Objective C section on the forums

[MK27]

I am sure you have heard expressions like 'featuritis', 'feature creep' or 'bloatware'.

Yes, we have discussed IDE's thoroughly.

[crowe]

Regardless of how popular Macs/Obj-C are, this forum doesn't have a good community of people who are familiar with that platform.

I know of quite a few that are very familiar with OS X(myself included). Obj-C, on the other hand... Not so much.

Does that warrant an OS X forum? No, probably not. Most issues can be figured out with a simple google search, and if there are even bigger issues Apples technical support staff actually speaks English as their first language!

The boom in Obj-C seems to be directly related to the iPhone, and as such I'm sure the fad with that will die down fairly soon(what with the over-saturation of the app store, and crappy business model that the iPhone supports). I'd say if people are still interested in Obj-C in five years, then maybe a separate forum could be considered.

[DavidP]

Regarding the topic of whether C# or Objective-C is more semantically similar to ANSI C, I would overwhelmingly have to side with C#.

I have seen a lot of Objective-C (although I have never coded in Objective-C), and every time I look at it I am simply bewildered because it looks nothing like C.

[Mad_guy]

I have seen a lot of Objective-C (although I have never coded in Objective-C), and every time I look at it I am simply bewildered because it looks nothing like C.

The question then becomes 'how much C# have you looked at and written'? If the answer is 'not much,' or "i've never coded in it" then I don't think this statement is really that unbiased in its view.

How does C# code that uses generics, lambdas/delegates, classes/objects (and soon dynamic typing) look 'any more' or 'act any more' like C than Objective-C with it's interfaces, messages and objects is what I'm wondering.

Again, I really just want to know on what basis/metrics you qualify your claims - saying "I looked at this totally arbitrary piece of objective-C code and it was totally weird and un-C-like so C# must be closer" isn't really a very good argument.

[Mario F.]

This is all fine and dandy. But I'm curious, mad_guy. Since you are the one consistently arguing against the opinions being expressed here, how about you start by answering your own questions? Can you objectivelly support your arguments, or are you going to spend the whole thread merely suggesting how everyone is so wrong?

[Mad_guy]

consistently arguing against the opinions being expressed here

'Consistently arguing'? I am merely questioning the basis on which people are making these evaluations. I am not trying to meaninglessly bicker as you seem to imply - I am genuinely curious as to why people have formed this opinion.

Can you objectivelly support your arguments, or are you going to spend the whole thread merely suggesting how everyone is so wrong?

I don't believe I ever told anybody "you're wrong" - I do however remember asking a few people about the basis upon which they made their evaluation that "C# is closer to C than Objective-C" - and I have yet to get a response that articulates that clearly other than "I saw arbitrary code written in Objective-C and it didn't look like it." Everybody is pointing out the change in syntax/semantics that Objective-C takes, and yet nobody has pointed out the large break in syntax/semantics that C# makes. Yet everybody so far has voted for C# being closer to C than Objective-C. The argument so far seems fairly one-sided, don't you think?

In any case, my reasoning is that they are more closely related if due to nothing else than the fact that A) all valid C programs are valid Objective-C programs because the language is a strict superset of the standard, and B) because it's possible to write all objective-C programs in a semantically equivalent way (that is, with all the exact same message passing, interfaces, classes, etc etc) using only the ANSI C subset + interfacing with the objective C runtime library which provides the support for such language features. Not all C programs are valid C# programs (in fact, probably none are without modifications,) and it's not possible to write every C# program in C in a semantically equivalent manner, i.e. you can fake OO with something like GObject, but you are not using the same runtime or library code for that matter. You're not even using the same compiler. On top of that you're also not getting lambdas/delegates or good generics either.

Is this good enough? At the very least, I think it is better reasoning then what has been proposed, and no, I'm not saying "I'm right, you suck" - I just want a more concrete argument than "I saw it once or twice at a glance and made my judgment."

[VirtualAce]

I think the general tone here is no we do not need another forum regardless of what it is for.

[tabstop]

The question then becomes 'how much C# have you looked at and written'? If the answer is 'not much,' or "i've never coded in it" then I don't think this statement is really that unbiased in its view.

How does C# code that uses generics, lambdas/delegates, classes/objects (and soon dynamic typing) look 'any more' or 'act any more' like C than Objective-C with it's interfaces, messages and objects is what I'm wondering.

Again, I really just want to know on what basis/metrics you qualify your claims - saying "I looked at this totally arbitrary piece of objective-C code and it was totally weird and un-C-like so C# must be closer" isn't really a very good argument.

I think my position was a little bit sideways of what you're saying. I'm saying something like this: Obj-C and C# have both (a) parts that are very much like C and (b) parts that are very much not like C, and whether or not they are very much related in fact, the parts of C# that aren't C look like C, or at least C++ at the worst [EDIT: Maybe just most of the parts -- obv lambda functors don't look like C or C++], while the parts of Obj-C that aren't C look like Smalltalk. If we have a separate forum for Obj-C, then more or less by definition only the parts that are different will be focused on in that forum, and for many of us (I'm one, and a couple other people have chimed in) Smalltalk is a foreign enough language that we are just simply not able to contribute. I'm not saying that I feel that I personally must be able to contribute to every forum on this site or else it's not worthwhile, but you will be lacking a large body of self-described experts willing to help that have accreted here on the C side, and I can't imagine it being less worthless than the C# forum is now. (At least most of us can read the posts in the C# forum, and can spot the easy syntax errors.)

Oh, and an edit edit: Although I wouldn't be surprised, if you took a poll, that the new forum would win; I wouldn't vote against it (I just wouldn't vote for it either), and I certainly wouldn't mind the ObjC forum existing and doing well, even if such would make me look like an idiot. I just don't expect it to happen, alas.

[Mario F.]

I do however remember asking a few people about the basis upon which they made their evaluation that "C# is closer to C than Objective-C" - and I have yet to get a response that articulates that clearly other than "I saw arbitrary code written in Objective-C and it didn't look like it." Everybody is pointing out the change in syntax/semantics that Objective-C takes, and yet nobody has pointed out the large break in syntax/semantics that C# makes. Yet everybody so far has voted for C# being closer to C than Objective-C. The argument so far seems fairly one-sided, don't you think?

I would agree, definitely. I however would prefer to point out how wrong the actual question is. It's like asking what's closer to a Ferrari; a red car, or a sports car? You may get a satisfying answer, but not a sound one.

In my opinion, the ability of Objective-C to compile C code is largely irrelevant. It does this trough compiler gimmicks to separate language specific code. A C program compiled with the GNU Objective-C compiler stays a C program, much like I'd argue against the idea that C code compiled with a C++ compiler magically becomes C++. I'm pretty sure C# could compile inline C code if the need existed for such a compiler feature. The fact it does not (to my knowledge) isn't because of anything specially pernicious about C# towards C.

It's in the differences between Objective-C and C# towards C, that one could probably look for things that approached one of the languages more towards C. Frankly I see no such thing. Both languages become vastly different from C once we start to use the features specific to them. On the account of Objective-C, you have garbage collection, the whole OOP shebang, the significantly different (to #include) #import directive.

In any case, I'd reckon that the most powerful argument for Objective-C being closer to C than C# comes not from its C inheritance (which could be compared to C++), but from the fact it can be implemented on top of existing C compilers.

[abachler]

Guys there is no need to be negative about the issue.

It was an idea. When you're in the morning meeting and ideas are being thrown around, however silly they may sound to you, you don't mock the idea. There is no reason to believe people wouldn't use a Mac programming forum.

A Mac Programming forum, where people can discuss all Mac related C, C++ and Objective-C would be a great idea. I see Windows, and Linux, but no Mac.

I've tried several times to get an assembly forum added, to no avail, but we get a C# forum which sees little traffic. It's really up to the whim of the sysop.

[valaris]

I've tried several times to get an assembly forum added, to no avail, but we get a C# forum which sees little traffic. It's really up to the whim of the sysop.

Hey, now an assembly forum would be cool :P