Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Matt Emson
Rumour has it that the Mac OS X 10.5 will not have 64bit Carbon support
under Intel. That means that Intel based Carbon based apps will only ever
be 32bit and that if 32bit support is ever withdrawn (likely?) Carbon will
be gone.

I know that the FPC GUI ports under Mac OS X tend to use Carbon.... anyone
heard any definite reports on this? I know OS News has one, but that is
allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use Cocoa to
build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?

Apaprently Troll Tech is unhappy as they use Carbon in their Qt port for
Mac OS X...

M

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Henry Vermaak
On 15/06/07, memsom <[hidden email]> wrote:
> allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use Cocoa to
> build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?

you can try and build all your functionality into an fpc dynamic lib
and then link to it out of xcode.  we'll need a layer to export the
objective c in a way that we can use it if we're ever going to use
cocoa directly.  i think it contains a gazillion objects, so this is
not trivial...

>
> Apaprently Troll Tech is unhappy as they use Carbon in their Qt port for
> Mac OS X...
>
> M
>

henry
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Florian Klämpfl
In reply to this post by Matt Emson
memsom schrieb:
> Rumour has it that the Mac OS X 10.5 will not have 64bit Carbon support
> under Intel. That means that Intel based Carbon based apps will only ever
> be 32bit and that if 32bit support is ever withdrawn (likely?) Carbon will
> be gone.
>
> I know that the FPC GUI ports under Mac OS X tend to use Carbon.... anyone
> heard any definite reports on this?

Currently, Cocoa is only usable from ObjC.

> I know OS News has one, but that is
> allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use Cocoa to
> build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?
>
> Apaprently Troll Tech is unhappy as they use Carbon in their Qt port for
> Mac OS X...

Well, they have the same problem as any non ObjC user probably: using
Cocoa from non ObjC languages is hard.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Jonas Maebe-2
In reply to this post by Matt Emson

On 15 jun 2007, at 17:00, memsom wrote:

> Rumour has it that the Mac OS X 10.5 will not have 64bit Carbon  
> support
> under Intel.

It's not just a rumour, and it's not Intel-only. Several parts of  
Carbon will not be 64 bit under Mac OS X 10.5. See the "64-bit  
Carbon" and "Is Carbon Viable?" threads at
http://lists.apple.com/archives/carbon-dev/2007/Jun/thrd3.html

(and on the following pages)

In particular the messages from Eric Schlegel (he's from Apple), e.g.
http://lists.apple.com/archives/carbon-dev/2007/Jun/msg00426.html
http://lists.apple.com/archives/carbon-dev/2007/Jun/msg00433.html

> That means that Intel based Carbon based apps will only ever
> be 32bit and that if 32bit support is ever withdrawn (likely?)  
> Carbon will
> be gone.

Nobody can say how likely that is. It definitely won't happen in the  
near future, since there are a lot of Carbon apps out there.

> I know that the FPC GUI ports under Mac OS X tend to use Carbon....  
> anyone
> heard any definite reports on this? I know OS News has one, but  
> that is
> allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use  
> Cocoa to
> build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?

Yes, it is (just as practical to do the logic in C or C++).


Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Jonas Maebe-2
In reply to this post by Henry Vermaak

On 15 jun 2007, at 17:09, Henry Vermaak wrote:

> you can try and build all your functionality into an fpc dynamic lib
> and then link to it out of xcode.  we'll need a layer to export the
> objective c in a way that we can use it if we're ever going to use
> cocoa directly.  i think it contains a gazillion objects, so this is
> not trivial...

You don't really have to do that, Apple already did that:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ObjCRuntimeRef/

And those routines can be used to build an Objective Pascal on top,  
to make interfacing easier. And for inspiration for that, see
<a href="http://www.pascal-central.com/cwpascal.html#Extensions%20providing%">http://www.pascal-central.com/cwpascal.html#Extensions%20providing% 
20compatibili
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Modula-2


Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Henry Vermaak
In reply to this post by Henry Vermaak
On 15/06/07, Henry Vermaak <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 15/06/07, memsom <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use Cocoa to
> > build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?
>
> you can try and build all your functionality into an fpc dynamic lib

by the way, do fpc dynamic libraries work in osx?  i remember that i
had to use the "-install_name" option with gcc.  does fpc have
something similar?

henry
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Jonas Maebe-2

On 15 jun 2007, at 17:18, Henry Vermaak wrote:

> On 15/06/07, Henry Vermaak <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 15/06/07, memsom <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > allegedly still hear-say. Is it even possible/practical to use  
>> Cocoa to
>> > build a GUI and then use Pascal code to do the logic?
>>
>> you can try and build all your functionality into an fpc dynamic lib
>
> by the way, do fpc dynamic libraries work in osx?

Yes.

> i remember that i
> had to use the "-install_name" option with gcc.  does fpc have
> something similar?

You can use the equivalent linker parameter using

-k'-dylib_install_name "Your Installation Location"'


Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Henry Vermaak
In reply to this post by Jonas Maebe-2
On 15/06/07, Jonas Maebe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> You don't really have to do that, Apple already did that:
> http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ObjCRuntimeRef/
>
> And those routines can be used to build an Objective Pascal on top,
> to make interfacing easier. And for inspiration for that, see
> <a href="http://www.pascal-central.com/cwpascal.html#Extensions%20providing%">http://www.pascal-central.com/cwpascal.html#Extensions%20providing%
> 20compatibili
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Modula-2

interesting, thanks for the links.

>
>
> Jonas

henry
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
In reply to this post by Matt Emson
On 6/15/07, memsom <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Apaprently Troll Tech is unhappy as they use Carbon in their Qt port for
> Mac OS X...

Everyone is unhappy. Office, Photoshop, Adobe products, Firefox,
wxWidgets, etc, are all based on Carbon.

Actually to me it seams that Apple is the only entusiastic company
about Objective C

This is sad, but at the same time isn't the end of the world, because:

* The transition to 64-bits will take time, so we have some years
still where work can continue with Carbon

* Even then 32-bits carbon apps will keep working normally on 64-bits computers

* Until 64-bits GUIs are really needed we will already have some way
of interfacing with Cocoa, which can be either supporting obj-c
objects on Pascal or procedurizing the Cocoa API

To write stand-alone apps the first approach is 1 million times
better, but, for example, to write a Lazarus interface the second is
more then enougth.

--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac losing Carbon support in 64bit Leopard

Ingemar Ragnemalm
In reply to this post by Matt Emson
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:

> On 6/15/07, memsom <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Apaprently Troll Tech is unhappy as they use Carbon in their Qt port for
>> Mac OS X...
>>    
>
> Everyone is unhappy. Office, Photoshop, Adobe products, Firefox,
> wxWidgets, etc, are all based on Carbon.
>
> Actually to me it seams that Apple is the only entusiastic company
> about Objective C
>  
They have lured many younger developers into the Cocoa cage, but AFAIK
the big players
are not there and are unlikely to go there since they need good
cross-platform solutions
and can't afford rewriting everything over and over again.

> This is sad, but at the same time isn't the end of the world, because:
>
> * The transition to 64-bits will take time, so we have some years
> still where work can continue with Carbon
>
> * Even then 32-bits carbon apps will keep working normally on 64-bits computers
>
> * Until 64-bits GUIs are really needed we will already have some way
> of interfacing with Cocoa, which can be either supporting obj-c
> objects on Pascal or procedurizing the Cocoa API
>  
And

* Apple might decide to make 64-bit Carbon if enough big players are
unhappy with the
situation.

If that happens (even if it only happens to the modern Carbon APIs like
HIView etc)
then all is well and we can go on moving forward.

If it doesn't happen, if Apple insists that Objective-C is the only path
into 64-bit, then a
third path will be needed, and I think that should be a strict
cross-platform solution.
That will make the Mac interface diverge more than before, but if Apple
does not open
better paths it will happen.

At the moment, I would like to see more detailed information about what
is actually
officially depreciated, what non-ObjC interfaces are actually ported (CG
for sure,
all low-level Unix stuff etc). There is a great confusion about what
"Carbon" really
is. If Apple drops QuickDraw, old Menu Manager and other old APIs, but
supports
the new APIs, I won't be happy about it but at least the time I spent
learning the new
ways is not wasted.


/Ingemar

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal