Talk:Objective-C/Archive 1 - Knowledge (XXG)

3206:

benchmark.) In fact, even before I read your comment, I had come to this Talk page just to raise this question: Is the section comparing C++ virtual method calls to ObjC message sending even worth including? I'm not trying to raise the debate of optimizing before or after profiling or anything like that, I just think that the scale is far too small to consider for nearly all purposes. We're talking about a difference of half a nanosecond (according to the source cited in the article). Even for such a common operation, that is such a small amount of time that I think it's misleading to present this as an legitimate point of comparison between the two languages. And why are we implicitly comparing Objective-C and C++ outside of a section that clearly indicates it's comparing them, anyway? As if the article were actually a critique of one or the other, rather than a set of information on Objective-C. At best, I would simply remove these two sentences, because I think they mislead and confuse without adding anything useful in return. Barring that, they should at least have some mention of the scale involved (e.g., "are faster than the C++ virtual method call in some implementations, by approximately half a nanosecond."). If this seems superfluous, then... why isn't the whole paragraph?

1534:

the same cannot necessarily apply at Apple where legacy programmers from the 'Apple' days stayed on and learned the language for better or for worse. Objective-C was also popular on Wall Street in the 1990s and financial applications aren't going to be the most trivial ever. Further: looking at matters from a mathematical or abstract point of view one would be forced to argue Objective-C is better suited to the nontrivial project. And this seems to be born out in recent empirical studies. Finally: any experienced system architect or system engineer is painfully aware of how C++, rather than being a boon for 'run of the mill' IT departments, invariably leads to drawn out troubleshooting for bugs of all degrees of insidiousness. Far from being merely an unsubstantiated opinion which could in theory be correct it's more likely an opinion which is dangerously incorrect.

1681:

ObjC allows NSArray to contain objects of any type, and class clusters allow clients to access any number of distinct classes from a single interface. Perhaps NSArray or class clusters have too little in common with generic programming, but a balanced comparison would fit in the dynamic capabilities of ObjC which are missing from C++, or at least point out that C++ is only capable of certain object features. As for meta-programming, I think that InterfaceBuilder and nibs may offer the same rapid development outcome without the excess baggage of generated code. Again, I may not have the complete picture with regard to the comparison, but I stand by my general opinion that the philosophical comparison is rather slanted towards C++ without good reason.

3529:"Many programmers dislike garbage collected languages because of the runtime performance tradeoffs. Objective-C applications commonly run with garbage collection. Apple introduced Automatic Reference Counting (ARC) in 2011 as an alternative memory management mechanism. With ARC, the compiler inserts retain and release calls automatically into Objective-C code based on static code analysis. The automation relieves the programmer of having to write in memory management code. ARC also adds weak references to the Objective-C language. While ARC removes the need for garbage collection and manually memory management, it is only available with Apple's XCode compiler." 1545:"In C++, object-oriented is a coding style intended to force a certain kind of organizational structure on the sourcecode. The use of straight C in a C++ project is discouraged, and not all C syntax is even supported by the compiler. The C++ syntax looks very similar to C, but this is not considered confusing, because the developer is expected to "unlearn" C and do everything in the new, C++, object-oriented way. C++ comes with a large class library of very general-purpose classes, which is treated as part of the language; developers are expected to know it, use it, and subclass it. 2571:

1995. What is the nature of these agreements? To what extent has Objective-C been free to use - or even free to licence - over the years? What are the current terms of licensing? Apple ship Objective-C with their ADC tools for free; similar tools for NeXTSTEP cost $ 10 K. There are also repeated suggestions institutions such as MIT went with C++ because Objective-C was not available at attractive terms. It would seem these details are deliberately not forthcoming but in everyone's interests it would be good if Knowledge (XXG) researchers could get to the bottom of this.

1766:

documentation, the compiler itself does not provide printf(). You still have to obtain the libraries separately, either as source or as an object file (admittedly, they're pretty much always there already). Same with C++ ... the standard library is still technically separate from the compiler, and thus somewhat separate from the language. I guess ObjC carries this to the extreme by completely failing to mention anything about Object or NSObject in the language specification. My real question is how do you describe this concisely and accurately to the uninitiated?

3880: 31: 3146:"When implementing container classes using statically-typed languages without generics (like Java prior to version 5), the programmer is forced to write a container class for a generic type of object, and then cast back and forth between the abstract generic type and the real type. Casting, however, breaks the discipline of static typing. For instance, putting in an integer and reading out a string will produce a runtime error." 342:

perhaps more importantly, the schema was incredibly poorly designed - i.e we never would have had the problem with a sane design. At the time, we had Java as an option, which does not allow multiple inheritance, either. For the better part of a decade, I have thus been convinced that multiple inheritance is neither necessary nor even difficult to avoid. But you have to know ObjC well and not think like a C++ designer.

4151: 2632:

generic programming explains that it is implemented differently in each language, allowing for dynamic typing in ObjC to meet the criteria, and the page for metaprogramming indicates that reflection is a key strategy - reflection being a feature that is vastly stronger in ObjC than C++. It might make more sense to use SmallTalk as the reference.

3690: 1474:

Most developers employed by large corporations for in-house apps need the restrictions of object-orientation (e.g. C++) to prevent that from happening. (Today it would be Java, which is even more restrictive.) That said, my section does seem much more professional and objective with the statement removed. Thanks, Allan. --

2594:

extra. I cannot speak to pricing between 1988 and 1990, or after NeXT stopped selling hardware. It's possible that they once charged $ 10K for ObjC (maybe for source code?), but I don't recall ever seing a price list with that figure on it (and I've kept all of the price lists I obtained before purchasing my first NeXT).

3929:

I understand a little Objective-C and I'm trying to master categories. The code examples could be clearer. As I try to read them now, they say "integer, integer, integer, integer". Can somebody that understand categories and Objective-C well, rewrite these code examples to help those of us who have

3621:

Request: could someone put the actual syntax for a method in the description of methods. I was following a tutorial on another site and needed to come to this specific information, but it wasn't in your article. I don't object to the very helpful example in Objective-C, I don't object to there being

3572:

It's probably worth noting what keywords were added to the language to support ARC, but only in the context of the language itself. Saying that "ARC adds weak references to the Objective-C language" is back-to-front. "Objective-C version ____ added the following keywords to support a compiler feature

2739:

The "Typing Discipline" in the infobox says "Static", however, if you go to the page and read the section on "Dynamic" typing, Objective-C is listed as an example of a language that is "Dynamic" typing. One of these must be at least partially wrong - either it's a combination and should be listed as

2517:

I can't speak to C#, but I don't think this is accurate in the case of Java. Just as you can implement a protocol in an Objective C class without declaring the protocol, you can implement an interface in a Java class without declaring the implementation. This approach might be less useful in Java due

2372:

This isn't quite right. What about CoreFoundation? Perhaps we should distinguish the "higher level" parts of the Cocoa frameworks from "the Cocoa programming environment" when making such a statement. It would also be prudent to distinguish, say, the AddressBook and CalendarStore frameworks from "the

1809:

In an article about a movie, you wouldn't write "Sadly, a sequel was never finished, which was an annoyance because the first one didn't fully explain to you what happened and you were left wondering why X did Y", it would simply say "Though the film ended without fully explaining the reasons for X's

1206:

Up until gcc 3.4, the #import directive was not implemented correctly. As a result, the GCC compiler automatically emitted a warning whenever #import was used. As of gcc 3.4, this problem has been fixed, so presumably, this warning is no longer emitted when code is compiled. If you are using an early

661:

None of the code snippets in this article really look like C to me at all. I don't want to just remove the info, but I'd like to revise it so it makes sense to people who are familiar with C but not Objective-C. But without understanding what the "single" syntax change (or "two" syntax changes) is,

567:

In all methods, parameters are defined with a colon followed by the expected parameter type in parentheses and the parameter name. In some cases it is useful to add descriptive text before each parameter, and in some cases it is unnecessary. When working with large projects it is often very useful to

203:

Among other clarifications, I deleted the following section, because most of it addresses attributes of the Mach-O runtime architecture/file format, not the Objective-C language itself. Other than delegation and remote invocation, none of the following is or was specific to Objective-C. NeXT machines

3617:

When methods are discussed in the implementation section of this article, there is a change in tone/ purpose. Instead of being an informative article on Objective-C, it starts being instead a tutorial for a C programmer on how to use Objective-C. In comparison, in an article on President Harding,

3158:

without defending *why* container classes being homogeneous is a bad thing (which it implies), and without--and this is the worst offense--mentioning that interfaces in Java and C# can be the type with which a generic is instantiated, in which case *any implementing instance of the interface* can be

2942:

I am a beginning programmer in Objective C, and am having a difficult time deciphering code snippets. I would like to create a new section that contains simple lines of code or snippets, and provides a 'simple' English (or other) language translation, as well as description of what is be written. I

2719:

The article currently (Apr. 19, 2009) says "If you are translating from C++/C97 the above code is somewhat equivalent to:". I assume that "C97" is supposed to be "C99"; I can't find any reference to a version called C97. Also, I don't believe C99 has the OO features the following code segment shows,

2570:

Ownership of and licensing terms for this language are crucial issues that need to be included - especially their histories. Objective-C was not patented into the public domain as for example C was. NeXT acquired a licence to even use the language. NeXT acquired the ownership of Objective-C first in

2274:

Apple’s Objective-C compiler allows you to freely mix C++ and Objective-C code in the same source file. This Objective-C/C++ language hybrid is called Objective-C++. With it you can make use of existing C++ libraries from your Objective-C applications. Note that XCode requires that file names have a

2238:

However, this information is really only usefull to those implementing a base-level framework(GNUstep, Cocoa, etc.) or a HOM implementation (most of those I've found use the NSProxy API). It's of little interest to anyone writing Objective-C code based on one of these base-level frameworks or using

2220:

There are probably on the order of 10 existing implementations using @selector(forward::), everyone else uses @selector(forwardInvocation:). It's certainly true that @selector(forwardInvocation:) is not part of the language but it's also true that forwarding messages in Objective-C is done with the

1680:

The "philosophical" comparison seems misleading, by not questioning C++ at all with regard to object-oriented programming (see opinion of Alan Kay), yet not allowing that ObjC is capable of generic programming or meta-programming. I may be confusing dynamic polymorphism with generic programming, but

1451:

This strikes me as POV-pushing at its worst. Unless someone can produce citable references that C++ is popular with "teams of average-proficiency developers", while ObjC is "more popular" with "high-proficiency developers" (I'd love to hear how the proficiency level of the developers in question was

883:

I've removed the line for now at least. If someone can explain what it was trying to convey, I'll try to rewrite it in a way that makes more sense, but this article is being cited elsewhere, and it's simply not correct. New language features require new syntax, and Objective-C has several language

679:

Those are the only two syntax changes I mentioned and changed. Other than the other keywords, it's all compatible with C. Have a look at the "Observer.m" file in the article. If you don't rely on OPENSTEP-style memory management, you use C-style memory management. The for loops, pointers, etc., it's

2631:

I agree that this article sounds like an attack. Most comparisons are phrased in terms of what C++ offers, as if that were the metric for all languages. I was not familiar with the terms generic programming and metaprogramming until reading here that C++ has them and ObjC doesn't - yet the page for

2612:

Sorry to interject - but this article reads like an attack / defense of C++/Java. Wish we could focus on the attributes of Objective C. I someone wants to defend java or C++ - create a new wiki page or do so in the foot notes. BTW: I'm not a big fan of Objective C - I like strong typing. I believe

2550:

Article leads with "Objective-C, often referred to as ObjC and sometimes as Objective C or Obj-C..." Is this really necessary? Objective-C is the correct name. ObjC and Obj-C are both obvious short forms. Objective C is just plain wrong. I recognize we want the redirects to be obviously pointing to

2351:

If the intent was originally to communicate that the garbage collection implemented for 2.0 used reference counting, please someone rectify this or let me know where I can read about it. I did not find a lot of concrete information when I attempted to Google around, and I am not personally aware of

2292:

file extensions merely set the initial default. Xcode has a popup in the file inspector which allows you to select the language. I've used this a few times to quickly check whether I should rename a file to fix something, because you can make the same thing happen without actually renaming the file

1982:

The logic with this design is that it is very clear what is intended and it prevents errors caused by type mismatches. One could argue that this route leads to needlessly verbose code. In practice this isn't a problem. From what I can tell this hasn't been added to the language because it simply

1742:

possible in bog-standard ObjC. Object provides for read: and write:. I don't think your changes are entirely correct re typing either: specifically, "All 3 statements are equivalent at runtime", but I can't think about this for too long at the moment, so I'll get back to this properly at some other

1719:

The root class Object and the metaclass Class are defined and the runtime provides for them, but semi-automated garbage control methods like retain and release are implemented by NSObject and not by Object. These methods were introduced with OpenStep (in NeXTStep we had alloc and free, remember?).

540:

All Objective-C implementations have always had a runtime that did the message passing. The difference between the original Stepstone product (and Stes's POC) and Apple's GCC extensions is that Stepstone implemented Objective-C as a preprocessor whilst NeXT (and later Apple) made a true Objective-C

341:

briefly, in response to (2): In 18 years of solid ObjC programming, I have only once thought that I needed multiple inheritance. It turned out that there were two reasons why this was not true. First of all, NSArray solved all of the problems with its -makeObjectsPerform: method. Second of all, and

3123:

It says the runtime binding of "methods" in Objective-C is similar to C# Extension Methods. I don't know Objective-C but I do know C#. The latter are purely a compiler feature that allow methods to be added without modifying the class (or even owning it). They are linked up at compile time and the

2760:

The type system in Objective-C is completely static, like C. There is no type coercion and no polymorphism of operators. On the other hand, a great chunk of the object system - that is, the message passing system, by which objects move control or data between each other - uses late binding, so you

2687:

The example you cite — involving adaptive compilation — is fundamentally different from what Objective-C provides. For example, Mac OS X provides no facilities for just-in-time compilation of C code. However, the runtime is highly dynamic, and allows classes to add and/or modified at runtime. (See

1533:

This is all still extremely POV and even moot as Objective-C has not enjoyed the widespread use of C++, making such comparisons impossible. Yet NeXT and Apple themselves have used this language to build an impressive set of frameworks and although Jobs argued his NeXT programmers were 'top drawer'

324:

2) Multiple inheritance is one of the features that I find sorely missing from ObjC. Whenever you actually dig into the implementation details, you find that the REAL reason a language doesn't include it is that it makes the classloader more difficult to write (sometimes lots). However this simply

3583:

This is either factually incorrect or misleading at best. First of all, it's spelled Xcode, not "XCode". Also, Xcode uses the LLVM compiler - the source for which is freely available - and Objective-C programs can be compiled without Xcode at all - so I fail to see how ARC has anything to do with

1727:

Another thing that needs doing is dealing with the language specification. Things like formal protocols maybe should move toward the end, while really powerful and distinguishing features like Categories and poseAs: should be featured. Anyway, the article is a great start, but a bit of tightening

1581:

Indeed. This section was clearly written by someone who doesn't know C++ at all (I don't think there is a single class in the standard library that programmers are meant to inherit from, for instance). I've just removed the section, because I don't have anything useful to say about the topic, and

1473:

Comment by DarelRex: I do not object to Allan's removal of this statement from the section I added - that seems reasonable and fair. For the record, by "high-proficiency developer" I meant a developer who can write large projects in straight C without creating a buggy, poorly organised nightmare.

1229:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using #import, as long as it works properly. The reason I recall that the compiler spat out before was that declaration that the header should be included once should be made in the header, not in the code, but using #ifndef guards has never been traditional

2593:

In 1991, the purchase of NeXT hardware included the NEXTSTEP 2 OS and the entire development environment for free. Granted, the hardware was several thousand dollars. At the time, equivalent Sun hardware cost exactly the same as NeXT hardware, but certain Sun DSP development tools cost $ 3,000

1752:

Fair enough on the archiving... I'd forgotten about read/write. Note, though, that archiving as a technical usage generally refers to the NSArchiver mechanism. Perhaps calling it serialization would be better? As for the runtime equivalence issue, go ahead and try it... The compiler doesn't put

1320:

The article implies that Objective-C created method categories and runtime loading of categories, while both of these ideas came from Smalltalk. It seems that the idea in Smalltalk was to use this for documentation, not extension, as classes could also be categorized. However I don't know how

252:

Libraries can be supplied in multiple versions in a single file. Applications can choose to use a specific version (4.3.2), the latest version (which happens to be 5.2.1), or even the latest of a particular major release (anything from 4.x). Versioning problems like this continue to haunt other

575:

I'm assuming that the second line in the code above is an example where optional "descriptive text" is shown. I'm assuming that the two examples of descriptive text are "withSpecifiedPreferences", and "beforePage". Is there any syntax mistakes in this code segment? It would seem to me that the

320:

1) the reason I mentioned the library format in this article is that I felt that it went hand-in-hand with the reusability issue. Without a good library system reusability is often reduced to cut-n-paste of source code. I agree it was not at all clear that there was a distinction, however, and

2338:

I've been tracking Objective C 2.0 for months, and nothing that I have seen, including GNU GCC repository code updates from Apple, indicates that dot notation will be available for anything but properties. In fact, doing dot notation for methods would be a major change and causes all sorts of

3222:

Not sure if five days is really long enough, but I've deleted the paragraph in question. If anyone objects or otherwise has something to add, feel free to revert it, but PLEASE mention it here for further discussion. I personally think it's superfluous for the reasons I've already mentioned.

1445:

For these reasons, C++ has been popular for big, in-house, corporate projects, written by teams of average-proficiency developers, who must be treated as interchangeable resources. ObjC is more popular as a language for development of commercial or independent applications, by one or a few,

296:

I had reverted this (for an accidental reason), but this material still is relevant, as Objective-C is not just the language, but the runtime as well. We can probably lose the multiple object format comment, however. You admitted yourself that delegation and remote invocation are part of the

2521:

I'm not sure what is meant by the difference (presumably between a declared protocol and an implemented but undeclared protocol) not being "detectable from outside code". It's my impression that a class which implements a protocol but does not declare the protocol will not return true for a

635:

isn't all that much different from C. What's markedly different is the comparatively different way things are written in Objective-C than in straight C. The only syntax changes are the square brackets for method calls and the notation for method calls, the rest is merely keyword changes, eg

3205:

Do you have any actual benchmarks to back this up? Unless the difference has been shown to be significant enough to affect real-world optimization, I don't think it's worth mentioning. (By the way, the source cited, though not authoritative at all, shows a minuscule difference in an actual

1765:

I'll phrase this as a question, but I think I know the answer. When people say that ObjC does not specify a class library, does that just mean that the language specification does not document any library conventions? I always learned that while standard C mentions printf() in the language

3645:

The introduction ends with "Generic Objective-C programs that do not use these libraries can also be compiled for any system supported by GCC or Clang." What libraries are "these libraries"? This is the first mention of libraries in the article. I suspect something got removed from the

2293:(which could piss off CVS). In other words, this is a feature of Xcode and the operating system or file system, not of Objective C itself, unless you're talking about a particular compiler (in which case there are command line options that Xcode is using to change the default behavior). 1555:"C++ comes with a large class library of very general-purpose classes" - I thought it comes with a library of template classes, and programmers aren't encouraged to subclass them, but to instantiate them. I rather think of C++ as a tool for _generic_ programming, more than one for OO. 487:

Re multiple inheritance, the way mixins are used in multiple-inheritance languages are precisely what categories are for, so I would agree with Iluvcapra's statement about protocols and other functionality giving you a way of avoiding it. Categories are so much more useful and obvious

3804:

Blocks is a custom extension available for C, C++, and Objective-C, but C++ and Objective-C are really built on top of C, which is why I think that it's technically a C extension (not feature, as you pointed out, since it's nonstandard). Also, I think I got the wrong article – it's

1963:

test-overloading.m:5: error: duplicate declaration of method '-init:' test-overloading.m:13: error: conflicting types for '-' test-overloading.m:10: error: previous definition of '-' was here test-overloading.m: In function '-': test-overloading.m:13: warning: conflicting types for

1484:

Yes but then you have to defend C++ as being 'object oriented' which of course is impossible. Smalltalk creator Alan Kay has been very explicit in that matter as you know. C++ is not object oriented; it is a hybrid language which can achieve certain object oriented features. 'Big

3189:

The discussion comparing the speed of sending a message vs. a method invocation only considers the time to resolve the target, and not the time to marshal arguments. Argument marshaling can be quite time consuming; the conclusions are questionable without an analysis of this.

2347:

The previous version of the garbage collection section made it sound like "garbage collection" and "reference counting" where equivalent terms, which they are not. I rephrased it to remove this implication, but in the process also removed the mention of reference counting.

3088:

I think there's a minor issue of terminology in the "Syntax" section, under "Messages". It's where a comparison is made to C++. An example suggests that you would use the following code in C++ for "sending the message method to the object pointed to by the pointer obj":

2910:

contains comparisons to Smalltalk that seems to have little to do with the respective languages, but instead available implementations of the languages. This is 1. not fair, 2. not pertaining to language, unless it can be traced back to the language definitions, such as

1796:

I think you're missing the point: "sadly" doesn't imply POV, it means that a factual problem is being illustrated, that casting does break the discipline of static typing and this is not a Good Thing. The sentence should probably be worded for stylistic reasons, though.

1548:

In a C++ compiled executable, the method names are gone, and the machine code is not significantly different than that generated by a C compiler. Further, the objects are not truly independent entities, but rather temporary constructs of the object that created them."

1844:

To elucidate some of the trouble with refining this article: you find very few programmers truly proficient in Objective-C at all - in comparison to the wide number who express 'some' proficiency in C++. Of the latter only a subset really understand the underlying

3288:

By adding a category that declares conformance to a protocol, a class can conform to a protocol (conformsToProtocol: returns YES) without publicly declaring it. Or it could add the protocol at runtime. Whether this is relevant to the article remains to be seen.

4125:

Finally, this source is an Apple website and Apple has an interest in selling Objective-C to C programmers, which is reason enough to doubt its reliability. I hope someone can come up with a better source for this, as this claim is made with the same source on

3124:

binary IL is the same as if they were regular methods. So there is no runtime aspect at all. If that means that this analogy is bad, could someone who knows that please fix it, and perhaps keep the C# observation but make it a contrast instead of analog.

1810:

doing Y, a sequel was never finished, leaving it forever unexplained". Perhaps it is more a stylistic issue, but since I've seen people in the past expound both static and dynamic typing as A Good Thing™ in X language, it seemed a biased POV to me.

204:

did have some of the first widely available shared library support, and did support multiple architectures in the Mach-O file format (circa NeXTstep/OpenStep 4.0), but none of these runtime features were intimately bound with the Objective-C language.

1376:

Class clusters is wrapping a large number of classes into a single public class. As an example, all the various number types -- short, int, long, float, double, etc -- have wrapper class -- NSShort, NSLong, etc --, and a grandparent wrapper NSNumber.

1886:. Thus I have attached the fact template. We should not be in a rush to include this fact in Knowledge (XXG), there will be time enough to do so after it is released. Likely, if no reliable source can be found, this information should go for now. -- 2142:

In context, there are two seperate examples "In the first statement, the object must conform to the aProtocol protocol, and in the second, it must be a member of the NSNumber class." This doesn't imply that each statement is to be used together.

2022:

categories provide function replacement, but not exactly function overloading. A proficient run-time hacker could use categories or other aspects of the run-time to implement function overloading (at run-time, of course, not at compile time).

845:

Don't forget that while C has no real concept of a dedicated object, this doesn't mean that there is a syntax change. A Objective-C object can be "casted down" to a struct, but it's not very common and isn't such a great idea in writing code.

2339:

problems like how to handle methods with more than one parameter. So I'm going to try out Knowledge (XXG)'s famous editing abilities and use my authorative knowledge of Objective C 2.0 to correct the article by deleting this section. - steve

2234:

private runtime. In fact, I don't know of any other compiler or any other runtimes than those I just mentioned. Note that in the case of Apple this has nothing to do with Cocoa other than that the frameworks depends on the private runtime.

3369:

Generic Objective-C programs that do not use these libraries can also be compiled for any system supported by ] or ], although programs which only require the Cocoa libraries may (perhaps with modification) be able to be compiled with ]

3254:

The Objective-C concept of protocols is different from the Java or C# concept of interfaces, in that a class may implement a protocol without being declared to implement that protocol. The difference is not detectable from outside code.

2512:

The Objective-C concept of protocols is different from the Java or C# concept of interfaces in that a class may implement a protocol without being declared to implement that protocol. The difference is not detectable from outside code.

3829:

To actually answer your question: yes, I think a small section in the "Language variants" section (probably in the Objective-C 2.0 section), we should include some basic information, a small code example, and link to the main article:

159:

Given the purpose and use of Objective-C, these features are certainly of questionable benefit. In addition, comparison to C#, Java, or Python is particularly unfair, as the languages are intended for considerably different purposes.

3618:

you wouldn't say, "He was born in the same state as President Lincoln, whose home state you're all familiar with." Most people reading about Harding know about Lincoln, just as most people reading an Objective-C page know about C.

2879:

article mentions that ObjC uses (id) for these case, but it's also common to use (MyObject *) instead of (id) - What I'm asking is whether ObjC is also "strongly" typed in that case. I know ObjC is not strongly typed when using (id)

2740:

such in the other article, or, it should be listed as "Dynamic" or a combination here in the infobox. I'm very new to Objective-C and don't know the answer to this question, does anyone here know how we can fix this discrepancy? --

2635:

By the way, Objective C is perfectly capable of strong typing at compile time, it just requires good developer habits when declaring variables and methods. There should be an Elements of Style for ObjC which exemplifies this fact.

1896:

Garbage collection has been publically announced on the Apple web site as part of the feature set for Objective-C 2.0. ("Enjoy modern garbage collection, syntax enhancements, runtime performance improvements, and 64-bit support."

1957:@interface test { } - (id)init:(int)i; // line 4 - (id)init:(double)x; // line 5 @end @implementation test - (id)init:(int)i { // line 10 } - (id)init:(double)x { // line 13 } @end 576:

descriptive text are not in their proper sections, separated by the colons. This seems a little confussing and seems like it needs to be corrected or have a quick explaination inserted that it is indeed correct because...

1047:

Even if there is evidence for this causal link, the sentence should be rewritten to one indicating that .. "The design of Objective-C contributed to the choice of single inheritance over multiple inheritence for Java."

1785:

I marked the Dynamic Typing section with a NPOV marker because of the last paragraph in the section. The words "sadly" "annoying" and just one too many uses of the second person make it lose its neutral point of view.

1595:

I have added this section back in after it was entirely removed by the above, anonymous user. I have, however, made changes to it in response to the specific points of criticism that were offered in the above text.

921:

Objective-C is a very "thin" layer on top of C. In fact it includes only one syntax change and about a dozen new keywords. The syntax change is for calling methods on objects, and is based on Smalltalk as opposed to

2689: 591:

to answer your question, there are no syntax errors in the example. In fact, it uses the preferred white space. Keep in mind that, like most C languages, Objective-C allows a lot of valid options for white space.

3162:

Collections of interfaces in Java and C# allow polymorphic variation while preserving type safety *at compile time*, which is more than can be said for dynamic typing, which this paragraph holds up as a virtue.

2765:

types) are static, just like the primitive types. "Weak typing" is a kind of a wooly phrase but I would propose that it doesn't really describe how Objective-C works; and neither, really, does "Dynamic typing".

716:

Interpretting all of that requires significant syntax changes from C. I'm not saying that Objective-C isn't a strict superset of C. But it seems that it has a significant number of additions to the syntax. --

427:

I don't disagree with this statement, but I don't think it's encyclopedic. It would be cool for someone to give a good pro/con discussion of multiple inheiritance over protocols/categories/delegation; did

2923:, and such. All too often, however, comparisons that aren't about language issues tend towards this-or-that-PL-advocacy, so care about comparing real life implementations should IMHO be taken. ... said: 3909:

Did anyone note that objective c is lacking a formal language specification? Until 2008 apple did include something like a syntax specification in their objective c spec, but i has since been scrapped.

2657:

This mechanism allows messages to be sent to an object defined first at runtime - something statically typed languages such as C++ and Java are incapable of per the current standards for both languages.

386:

sense. Then again, I wonder how many ObjC newbies like myself would agree with the statement "delegation is trivial" if NSObject didn't come shrinkwrapped with the -delegate and -setDelegate: methods.

1835:

Your analogy is incorrect, and it's not about static and dynamic typing, the sentence is about casting. But we both agree the sentence needs to be rewritten, so there's no need to argue this further.

2201:

about OS X nor GNUstep, it's about Objective-C. Just because Cocoa/OPENSTEP provide different library functions to perform forwarding, doesn't mean that it's somehow a part of Objective-C. It isn't.

2696:

uses this to map a Python class to an equivalent, dynamically defined Objective-C class. To my knowledge, the Java reflection APIs merely provide the ability to introspect a class but not modify it.

1634:

I think the rewrite is okay, but there was some good information about Objective-C that was removed from the section. Now it has a pretty heavy C++ focus, which might not be the best approach in an

951:

Declaring interface/implementation is not really new syntax. It's merely using the new ways of writing methods and the new keywords in a certain block. That doesn't make it a new syntax altogether.

77:'s ownership is still lost, at least October 2002 through March 2003. If it becomes relinked, please fix it. Otherwise be warned it is one of those casino ads+list of searches pages. -User:Geoffrey 2530:

I believe your impression is wrong. -conformsTo: is a run-time check, not a compile-time check, so the difference would be lost after compiling. Perhaps Java maintains the distinction at run-time.

1401:

Another example of a class cluster might be a wrapper on a read-only file -- depending on the file, it might be implemented as a memory mapped file, or a standard file that was seek'd around in. --

1720:

Similarly with archiving, etc. I don't have any more time for this article tonight, but it needs some attention in this matter. It is possible that some of that information should move over to

1696:

e.g. the "philosophical" comparison should point out that C++ is not capable of dynamic typing, whereas ObjC can handle both dynamic typing and static typing, under control of the programmer.

3997: 1862:"Categories and protocols may be used to provide many of the benefits of multiple inheritance, without many of the disadvantages, such as extra runtime overhead and binary incompatibilities." 1398:

that would turn it into math calls on those variables (assuming they were NSNumbers, or another class with similar methods.) This basically meant that an NSNumber wrapper was a full citizen.

1386:

Class clusters requires categories, at least if they are extendable -- for the complex, for example, you need to be able to add something to NSNumber that can return your new complex class.

3155:"This problem is addressed in, for example, Java 5 and C# with generic programming, but then container classes must be homogeneous in type. This need not be the case with dynamic typing." 1219:

And leaving semi-official sources, there's all sorts of explanations, mostly "political reasons". So, style, politics, bad implementation, or something else? Does anyone here know? --

405:

You can add methods to a class without subclassing it or having the implementation source code available to you. This feature, as I understand it, is unique to ObjC and its predecessor

314:

If there was ever proof that the wiki "works", this article is it. I wrote the first draft over a period of a few days and now I see it has been greatly expanded and much more readable.

419:

It's one of the main things that sets Objective-C above confused languages like C++. At any rate: that's an 'opinion' and even your comment has no place in a discussion of this article.

4016:

can tell you that there are at least two notions of superset that may be relevant: either all C programs are also Objective-C programs, or all C programs are also Objective-C programs

1613:

I've rewritten the section entirely to conform to what C++ is actually like. I was hesitant to do this before and removed the entire section because I don't really know Objective C.

1301:

That doesn't mean you can use them. If you actually read the gcc manpage: "Currently, this option is only available in conjunction with the NeXT runtime on Mac OS X 10.3 and later."

2484:

Agreed. I love Objective C, but there is too much detail in the examples. There are other wikis available for detailing Objective C - you could even start your own on another site!

120:

and the talk page carefully to see why this doesn't have " programming language" added. There are some who favor adding it always, but they're probably Pascal programmers. :-) :-)

328:

3) I think GNU's implementation of GC deserves some expansion, as I believe they did it cleanly and in a very usable manner. IMHO, Apple would do well to simply copy it outright.

1806:

I think YOU are missing the point. Any experience in programming with this language would make it clear why things are done in this way - why in fact this is truly a Good Thing™.

449:

3) I think GNU's implementation of GC deserves some expansion, as I believe they did it cleanly and in a very usable manner. IMHO, Apple would do well to simply copy it outright.

649:

Well, adding new keywords necessarily requires syntax changes. The entire concept of objects is absent from C. And this kind of code is completely different from C style code:

214:'s) realization that there is considerably more to programming than the language. The system has to be usable and flexible as a whole in order to work in a real-world setting. 1513:

Another alternative would be to find an article where someone makes the same claims that you have, at which point it would be reasonable to add a statement to the effect that

2761:

get no guarantee at compile time about the type of the return value, like you do in C++, Java etc. On the other hand, object types for variables (or more accurately, object

218:

Delegating methods to other objects at run-time is trivial. Simply add a category that changes the "second chance" method to forward the invocation to the delegate. Presto!

2613:

things should fail at compile time - not at runtime, or we will have javascript hell. Dynamic binding is not an excuse. But anyway - please, let's focus on Objective C.

2415:

This article is a bit ridiculous. First it is too long. Second it is too technical. It's really not an article at all. It is actually the start of a user manual.

3416:

The text field discovers whether the delegate implements that method (via reflection) and, if so, calls the delegate's method to support the auto-complete feature.

2269:

I find it really strange that the article makes absolutely no mention of the difference between using the .m and .mm extensions for your implementation files. From

2597:

I believe that, at the time, problems with Objective-C included that nobody had a run-time, and that there were initially no alternate compilers for the language.

2526:

protocol test. Perhaps this is what is meant by detecting the difference "from inside code". What could be meant by detecting the difference "from outside code"?

156:

The listed disadvantages are somewhat questionable: Garbage collection, Operator overloading, Multiple inheritance, and C primitive types not first-class objects

1389:

I don't know if Java 1.5 added anything to support this, but this type of construct was impossible in Java 1.4 and earlier, because of that need for categories.

572:-(void) setRange:(int)start :(int)end; -(void) importDocumentWithName:(NSString *)name withSpecifiedPreferences:(Preferences *)prefs beforePage:(int)insertPage; 1104:; and as always, a Knowledge (XXG) article was one of the top links. (This one, obviously.) I think it would be good to add something on that in the article. 621:

Am I the only one who thinks that's totally inaccurate? Looking at the code snippets, it seems clear that there are quite a few very large syntax changes. --

210:

ObjC in fact included a laundry-list of features that are still being added to other languages, or simply don't exist at all. These led from Cox's (and later,

4305:

Added some quotes to indicate that this is not a well-defined statement, as suggested by the previous poster. Sources are all somehow affiliated with Obj-C.

3544:

First of all, who are "many programmers", and why do we care? I fail to see the relevance to the article. This isn't an opinion piece - it's an encyclopedia.

3622:

an additional purpose of comparing to C (which no doubt will help many readers), but the Objective-C article should at a minimum first explain Objective-C.

1878:

As far as I know, apple has not announced GC. While it may have been brought up at WWDC, with whatever betas, these are under NDA and so this fact is not

117: 2107:

This is incorrect because these two lines can't exist together like this in the same header file. error: duplicate declaration of method '-setMyValue:'

432:

not have multiple inheiritance? It seems that protocols and delegation give you a way of avoiding it, keeping classes simple but instances complicated.

4265:

that the language is superset of C, without proving or even arguing this. There is, apparently, no standard grammar of Objective-C (anymore?); there's

1410:

The 'Messages' section is a good place to mention class clusters. It is because of the dynamicism mentioned in this section that class clusters work.

2009:

I'm sure there's still the possibility of function overloading in other cases, but I haven't been able to test anything. I could be wrong, however.

3782:

Apple introduced Blocks, a form of closure, as a nonstandard extension into C, C++, Objective-C 2.0 and in Mac OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" and iOS 4.0

2785: 3102:

I know different programming languages use terms differently, so maybe I'm just being pedantic, but perhaps a correction here would be helpful?

933:

That's a rather different message. I'm going to edit the section to say that Objective-C has a syntax borrowing from both C and Smalltalk. --

3698: 3456:

indicates Objective-C is on a steep ascendancy. There must be some market reason behind this, prob some product from Apple Inc.. What is it?

471: 108:

programming language, meaning "Objective-C" should probably be changed to "Objective-C programming language", which currently is redirected.

2214:

You're right, I was wrong. The sample code is not out of date, it's just irrelevant for most people trying to do forwarding in Objective-C.

234:

where freed objects are swizzled into Zombies, whose only purpose is to report an error when someone calls them. Swizzling was also used in

3894: 3847: 3818: 3750: 3672: 3430: 3317: 2767: 2060: 1077:

You can fix this yourself, you know. By the way, see the Java article's external links for a document for evidence, if you're interested.

1066: 2270: 2943:

was going to create my own wiki for this, but thought it might be an appropriate section for this article. Any thoughts or suggestions?

2395:

CoreFoundation is not Objective C. It is a standard C API which bridges to Objective C object instances. I don't think it belongs here.

2227:- (retval_t) forward: (SEL) sel : (arglist_t) args; // with GCC - (id) forward: (SEL) sel : (marg_list) args; // with NeXT/Apple systems 1490:

You may well be right about the quality of in-house developers. My point was that unless someone can produce a reference that shows that

3601: 3274: 2950: 2721: 2616: 2463: 2444: 2422: 1354: 1336: 556: 186:

I may agree with GC, OO, multiple inheritance, but not having some sort of treatment of C primitive types as first-class objects can be

2110:

This is bad style because the ObjC way to set values is to use the name of the value. It is best to give a concrete examples of this.

3380: 3340:" I thought I'd ask about the appropriateness of changing a bit of text here before I did it, more specifically to mention the use of 2788:

for details.) The core C types are statically typed with no dynamic type checking whatsoever, as is common for C. Objective-C objects

2380: 1515:

Person X claims that C++ has been popular for big, in-house, corporate projects, written by teams of average-proficiency developers...

285: 175: 3993:

of C; it is possible to compile any C program with an Objective-C compiler, and to freely include C code within an Objective-C class.

3578:"While ARC removes the need for garbage collection and manually memory management, it is only available with Apple's XCode compiler." 3290: 3170: 1570: 984:

of a language defines what is legal. Interface/implementation declarations have a syntax. All language features have a syntax. --

92: 2254: 2186: 2131: 2085: 1998: 1425: 4258: 1499:

In-house programmers are "average-proficiency" (by some measure) while commercial/independent programmers are "high-proficiency"

867:

I'm talking about the syntax used for declaring interfaces, declaring implementations, messaging, etc. It's all new syntax. --

3095:

Strictly speaking, "obj" isn't really a pointer in this context. If it was a pointer, you'd need the following syntax instead:

2578: 1915: 134: 4273:

all C-code compiles in an ObjC compiler" (emphasis added) and counterexamples can be found on various places on the internet.

3558:"With ARC, the compiler inserts retain and release calls automatically into Objective-C code based on static code analysis. " 2664:

It can even accept dynamic input, turn this into code and apply the full power of the platform's optimizer to this new code.

382:, under the history section. The NS* object framework is a vendor-supplied library, and not like a "standard library" in the 3946: 3858: 3833: 3806: 398:

You can use C sources in the middle of your Objective-C project without porting, something you absolutely cannot do with

4224:

But there are still program that do not compile. You need to change some C programs to make them work, just like in C++.

3014:

Is there a place for this text in the Objective-C-related articles? Perhaps in the Wikibook? Thanks, and all the best, --

260:

Code can be provided in multiple object formats for different platforms, in a single library. This avoids the need for a

224:

is trivial. Simply add a category that changes the "second chance" method to serialize the invocation and forward it off.

2313:

I was under the impression that the dot notation could only be used to access properties, and not for all method calls.

235: 241:

All libraries are dynamically linked. This meant that large Objective-C programs were in fact quite small, because the

2230:

Both examples work with GCC, just with different runtimes. The first works with the GNUstep runtime, the second with

1825: 1260: 506:

The article mentions "strong typing" all the time where they in fact mean "static typing". All in favor of replacing?

264:

entirely. Typical multi-platform Objective-C programs are smaller than most single-platform programs on other systems.

3363:

Generic Objective-C programs that do not use these libraries can also be compiled for any system supported by ] or ].

2849:, especially when used as a messaging system so the thing being called might not even be compiled at the same time. 3741:

I might be able to do this within in the next days (time permitting, of course), but you are welcome to attempt it!

2784:

That is not entirely accurate. Objective-C is dynamically typed, but with optional static type checking. (Refer to

238:

to create database faults. Swizzling is used today by Apple's Foundation Framework to implement Key-Value Observing.

4292:

sources do not sell objc. cited statement supports stated statement. per you, "strict" is undefined, hence ignored.

3777: 3769: 1174: 242: 38: 4153:. "Strict" means that the semantics are the same. So it is an actual superset, not an approximate one like C++. -- 4335: 2885: 2828: 2823:

What is the definition of "strong" typing? It would seem that Objective C can be strongly typed at compile time.

2641: 2602: 2535: 2489: 2400: 2369:"As of 2007, all Mac OS X classes and functions in the Cocoa programming environment are prefixed with "NS" ..." 2298: 2028: 1771: 1701: 1686: 613:

Objective-C is a very "thin" layer on top of C. In fact it includes only one syntax change and about a dozen new

597: 467: 347: 4127: 3890: 3843: 3814: 3746: 3719: 3668: 2998: 2800:; methods may or may not, at their discretion, check whether an argument implements a certain type or protocol. 2771: 2551:

the right article, but I don't think the lack of a hyphen is going to cause anyone any great mental anguish. --

383: 3434: 3321: 2056: 1062: 3597: 2954: 2725: 2620: 2467: 2448: 2426: 1358: 1332: 1170: 4158: 3384: 3278: 3129: 2796:— but this information is disposed of during compilation. The runtime type model beyond that is essentially 2373:

Cocoa programming environment" since they also don't use an "NS" prefix (but "AB" and "Cal" respectively).

1979:@interface test { } - (id)initWithInt:(int)i; // line 4 - (id)initWithDouble:(double)x; // line 5 @end 1523: 1458: 1097: 552: 171: 3934: 3699:

http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/cocoa/Conceptual/Blocks/Articles/00_Introduction.html

3589: 3426: 3376: 3313: 3294: 3270: 3166: 2946: 2574: 2440: 2418: 2376: 2242: 2174: 2119: 2073: 2048: 1986: 1903: 1813: 1566: 1558: 1413: 1350: 1324: 1248: 1054: 544: 459: 394:

Apart from this, I think there are two main points about reusability, unrelated to what library you use...

273: 267:

Archiving. An object can be archived into a stream, such as a file, and can be read and restored on demand.

163: 130: 80: 3109: 3019: 2384: 2250: 2182: 2127: 2081: 1994: 1421: 281: 254: 3886: 3839: 3810: 3742: 3729:

Added a brief section in both the C and Objective-C articles about blocks and pointed to the main article

3664: 2755:

It's hybrid. The question is -- is ObjC really weak typed? I don't think so. Can someone demonstrate why?

2052: 1058: 107:

The programming languages master list(s) seem to be switching the primary page names to <language: -->

3593: 3195: 3174: 1328: 581: 548: 109: 88: 4207: 3259:

is wrong because a class that does not explicitly declare that it implements a protocol, will fail the

3125: 2169:- (void) forwardInvocation: (NSInvocation*)anInvocation { if (]) return ; else return ]; } 277: 167: 3963: 3228: 3211: 1614: 1583: 1562: 1392:

As for basic types "Not full class citizens", years ago there was a preprocessor for statements like:

4331: 3357: 2881: 2824: 2637: 2598: 2531: 2485: 2396: 2323:

Correct; however, I believe that it will be available for all method calls (like Java) in Obj-C 2.0 —

2294: 2246: 2178: 2123: 2077: 2024: 1990: 1767: 1697: 1682: 1417: 1256: 593: 463: 343: 334: 3626: 3539:"Many programmers dislike garbage collected languages because of the runtime performance tradeoffs." 3149:

Nobody argues that. That's one of the many reasons generics were added to Java waaaay back in 2004.

1402: 1190:

Do you get this obnoxious warning whenever you compile an application, tool, or Objective-C program:

832: 3765: 3733: 3723: 3630: 3349: 3191: 2582: 2314: 1911: 1383:

This setup is extendable -- you could, for example, add a complex number type underneath NSNumber.

577: 138: 3864: 3790: 3704: 2221:

API provided by the base-class, not the language defined API. This should at least be mentioned.

321:

perhaps the article should include a section on these issues under a "ObjC in Next" type heading?

4314: 4282: 4257:

Restored the disputed template, and added {{verify credibility}} to the sources. All of them are

4233: 4188: 4154: 4139: 3453: 3072: 3045: 2556: 2328: 2282: 1518: 1453: 368:

perhaps the article should include a section on these issues under a "ObjC in Next" type heading?

3879: 1964:'-(id)init:(double)x' test-overloading.m:4: warning: previous declaration of '-(id)init:(int)i' 1285: 1252: 568:

have long, descriptive method names that make it easier to determine how each parameter is used.

436:

AFAIK Smalltalk did not have multiple inheritance. At any rate Objective-C studiously avoids it.

1109: 3942: 3868: 3794: 3708: 3105: 3015: 3002: 2970: 2745: 1947: 221: 3337: 3310:

writes: "I'm pretty sure that Java's 'interface' is a direct rip-off of Obj-C's 'protocol'"

4027:

As a superset of the C programming language, Objective-C supports the same basic syntax as C

3502: 3461: 3419:

Maybe The text field discovers whether the delegate implements that method (via reflection)

3400: 3307: 3059: 2928: 2808: 2704: 375: 84: 47: 17: 2668: 1864:

by removing the vague (POV?) claims about "the many disadvantages of mutiple inheritance".

683:

None of the following lines (except the "else") or several others in the code are C syntax:

4013: 3915: 3488: 3480: 2854: 2677: 1821: 261: 246: 121: 3159:

added to the container. Meaning heterogeneous. Meaning the section is essentially wrong.

1883: 4012:

First off, the notion of a "strict superset" is not defined here. Anyone well-versed in

3054:

I attempted to fix this by mentioning it a bit earlier in the article. Does it suffice?

245:

was already on the machine. Common today perhaps, but this is from the early 1980s when

3653: 2919:, etc.. If such tracks are lacking, then such statements should be placed in a section 2231: 2202: 2158:

The sample code in the forwarding section is out of date for both MacOS X and GNUstep.

2144: 2010: 1907: 1865: 1836: 1798: 1744: 1302: 1272: 1231: 1078: 1018: 952: 847: 637: 515: 494: 441: 302: 191: 3787:

So the question is... should "block objects" be discussed in the Objective-C article?

2462:

An instructions wiki, sure, but this is an encyclopedia, not a repository of manuals.

1879: 1505: 4306: 4274: 4225: 4180: 4131: 3353: 3345: 3069: 3042: 2792:

be statically typed — by using class pointer types instead of an unqualified type of

2552: 2324: 2278: 1656: 1597: 1475: 1440:

I have just removed the following biased and unsupported statement from the article:

526: 507: 3930:

programming experience, but are trying to learn categories understand them better?

3938: 2741: 2045:

Could someone who knows ObjC well enough provide a "programming language" infobox?

1967: 1753:

typechecking into the code. All object typing is advisory to the compiler only. --

1220: 3760:

The new Objective-C feature called "block objects", in computer science terms, is

3613:

Discussion: Method description should be method description, not C-programmer tute

416:

Multiple inheritance is one of the features that I find sorely missing from ObjC.

362:

Being a newbie to Objective-C, but a big fan, I would offer the following opinion

2720:

so I'm going to just delete the reference to C. Someone correct it if I'm wrong.

1898: 453:

GNU did not implement GC with GCC. It uses the boehm-gc garbage collector AFAICR

4339: 4319: 4287: 4238: 4193: 4162: 4144: 3979: 3967: 3959: 3950: 3919: 3898: 3872: 3851: 3822: 3798: 3754: 3712: 3676: 3657: 3634: 3605: 3510: 3498: 3492: 3469: 3457: 3438: 3404: 3396: 3388: 3325: 3298: 3282: 3232: 3224: 3215: 3207: 3199: 3178: 3133: 3113: 3075: 3063: 3055: 3048: 3039:

Subsequent calls are IMP cached and 50% faster than the C++ virtual method call.

3023: 2982: 2958: 2932: 2924: 2889: 2876: 2858: 2846: 2832: 2812: 2804: 2775: 2749: 2729: 2708: 2700: 2681: 2645: 2624: 2606: 2586: 2560: 2539: 2493: 2471: 2452: 2430: 2404: 2388: 2359: 2332: 2317: 2302: 2286: 2258: 2205: 2190: 2162: 2147: 2135: 2089: 2064: 2032: 2013: 2002: 1970: 1933: 1919: 1890: 1868: 1839: 1829: 1801: 1790: 1775: 1757: 1747: 1732: 1705: 1690: 1672: 1669: 1659: 1642: 1639: 1617: 1600: 1586: 1574: 1528: 1478: 1463: 1429: 1405: 1362: 1340: 1305: 1288: 1275: 1264: 1234: 1223: 1070: 1021: 988: 955: 937: 923: 905: 888: 871: 850: 835: 721: 666: 640: 625: 601: 585: 560: 475: 351: 289: 179: 142: 96: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3304: 2275:“.mm” extension for the Objective-C++ extensions to be enabled by the compiler. 1245:

I am not sure, but is there 'try ... except'-like construction in Objective-C?

3911: 3484: 2850: 2673: 2356: 1817: 1787: 1347:

Isn't there a clear link between these categories and the notion of a Mixin?

985: 934: 885: 868: 718: 663: 622: 900:

Objective-C's syntax is based on Smalltalk, and is is different from that of

297:

language, so these were replaced, as with swizzling and archiving, which are

3649: 3646:

introduction and this sentence was not updated to comply with that removal.

3423:, if so, calls the delegate's method to support the auto-complete feature. 3344:

as a possible replacement for Cocoa. (This, after all, is its purpose: as a

1960:

gcc 4.0.1 (from latest Apple development tools) gives the following errors:

1452:

measured), then I think this statement is better left out of the article. --

1380:

When you create an NSNumber, you automatically get an appropriate subclass.

429: 406: 231: 227: 4039:

programs are also valid C programs, but with a different meaning, famously

3722:

feature? I can't seem to find any information in the C article either, but

2070:

Could someone who knows wikipedia well enough direct me on how to do this?

1044:"Since Java was influenced by Objective-C, this is also the case in Java." 811:

Maybe what's needed is the explicit mention that the two new syntaxes are:

3452:

Not, that I'm any less skeptic towards Objective-C than just any PL, but

3247:

section. I started a new section to properly document this dubious claim.

1373:

Completely missing from this article is any discussion of class clusters.

1271:

Yes, in the Apple extensions to Obj-C, but not in the GNU implementation.

4175:

gives an example of a valid C module that doesn't even compile in Obj-C:

3989: 1930: 1887: 1754: 1729: 1721: 4031:

which (ignoring the apparently spurious word "basic") only talks about

3476: 3341: 3263:

test. So it does not truly implement that protocol, and the difference

1517:— this makes the claims a verifiable statement of someone's opinion. -- 1167: 1142:

option, you could modify the compiler source code and set the variable

614: 4023:

For that definition, this is not good enough a source. It states that

2224:

Also, the comments are wrong in this code from the Forwaring section:

1504:

then your claims, while they may be well-grounded in reality, are not

4172: 2661:

Java can indeed define brand new objects and classes during runtime.

1284:

In GNU since GCC 3.3. My book mentions only old Cocoa NS_ macros. --

981: 795:

if( boolean test ) statement ; else statement ;

655:- (int)changeColorWithRed:(int) r green: (int) g blue: (int) b ... ; 4208:

http://lists.apple.com/archives/objc-language/2004/Dec/msg00060.html

2100:

I object to the sample code provided on the grounds of correctness.

4036: 3726:

exists without any C examples. It probably would be helpful if we:

3395:

IIRC Gnustep is not a compiler, so that would be indeed incorrect.

2518:

to the greater use of static typing, but it certainly can be done.

1951: 399: 190:

at times, though I can understand completely why it's not done so.

3243:

There is already an unrelated discussion on this statement in the

4035:, not semantics. This matter, because there are cases where e.g. 3041:. We need an explanation of what IMP is (or a link to one). -- 2693: 1582:

that's better than just leaving bogus information sitting there.

1493:

C++ is more popular for big in-house corporate projects than ObjC

4020:. Given the emphasis in the text, I assume the latter is meant. 3549:"Objective-C applications commonly run with garbage collection." 1496:

ObjC is more popular than C++ for commercial or independent apps

1158:, as shown above, which makes your code work with all compilers. 379: 211: 1107:

However, I'm not sure exactly what. Here's a snippet from the

1040:

Object to the use of this phrase (no pun intended, but hey... )

1976:

I can verify this. The comon idiom is to write code like so:

74: 25: 4330:

What is the license of objective-c? Who owns the copyright?

1716:

Unlike C, Objective C does not specify any class libraries.

3567:"ARC also adds weak references to the Objective-C language." 230:

allows for classes to change at runtime. Typically used for

4266: 636:"@interface", etc. I'll change that to two syntax changes. 390:

True but NeXT added features to the original language spec.

1130:

The GNU Objective-C compiler emits a warning when you use

2161:

Instead, create a sample derived from the one <a href=

901: 2669:

http://fivedots.coe.psu.ac.th/~ad/jg/javaArt1/index.html

2437:

I agree, but is this not the perfect use for a wiki???

4106:

which is valid C89, valid C++98 and C++11, and outputs

3562:

Isn't this a feature of the compiler, not the language?

1655:

Thanks, Mipadi, for your wording edit. Looks good! --

3554:

Isn't this a feature of the runtime, not the language?

1954:) is not possible, as is shown in the following code: 1138:

poor style. You can turn off the warning by using the

4171:

That source doesn't actually define "strict" either.

3519:

Opinions and factual errors in the "Analysis" section

3068:

OK, I get it now. IMP = Implementation. Thanks. --

2969:The following section was removed from the article 1207:compiler, you can supress these warnings by adding 762:- (retval_t) forward: (SEL) sel : (arglist_t) args 696:- (retval_t) forward: (SEL) sel : (arglist_t) args 3244: 2239:a HOM implementation because it's too low-level. 1150:) or you could convert your code to use pairs of 758:New keyword line, defines a "namespace" (a class) 374:These are perhaps better left to the articles on 541:compiler that didn't have C code as its output. 3925:Example Usage of Categories Could Be More Clear 783:Just another pointer declaration to some type. 456:Yes, but they added it. It's a GNU extension. 118:Knowledge (XXG):Naming conventions (languages) 4150:Google will give you plenty of sources, e.g. 3701:) is not mentioned in the article. Why not? 3683:No mention of "code blocks" (a.k.a. closures) 2163:http://www.gnustep.org/resources/ObjCFun.html 1552:I really don't understand the last sentence. 536:Misunderstanding in Language Analysis section 8: 2965:Stuff removed from Boolean data type article 2917:"Objective C is defined so that necessarily" 770:(retval_t) forward(SEL sel, arglist_t args) 325:moves the problems off of them and onto us. 3958:I agree, the examples could be more clear. 3857:Great! Thanks for calling my attention to 3152:Furthermore, the paragraph goes on to say: 1196:warning: using `#import' is not recommended 3663:The article seems to have been clarified. 2114:) anObject; - setCount: (NSNumber*)count; 331:Any comments here? Should I just dive in? 3524:This paragraph is particularly troubling: 1093:I was trying to find some information on 2938:Enhanced Glossary / Code line translator 2343:Rephrasing of garbage collection section 253:systems to this day, including Java and 3332:Is mention of GNUstep appropriate here? 4206:id is typedef void. you can undef id. 1321:method categories were actually used. 1017:Ok, I think I see what you mean here. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3905:Lack of formal language specification 3861:. I agree with what you said above. 2997:. Since Objective-C is a superset of 2113:- setDelegate: (id <aProtocol: --> 2104:) foo; - setMyValue: (NSNumber*)foo; 1182:1.2.4 What are these import warnings? 1051:i.e. contributed rather than caused. 774:namely, a function/method definition. 742:I would point out that this sample is 127:Agreed. There is no ambiguity here. 7: 3573:called ARC:" would be more accurate. 2103:- setMyValue: (id <aProtocol: --> 787:if( ) ; else ; 703:if( ) ; else ; 3780:article's section on Objective-C: 3143:This paragraph sets up a strawman: 3084:Slight inaccuracy in C++ comparison 1121:3.4 Why am I lectured about using 24: 3056:Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen 3003:C language semantics for booleans 2805:Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen 2701:Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen 3878: 3697:This new language feature (see: 3688: 1436:Biased and unsupported statement 631:That's possibly true, but there 29: 3336:In the interest of "be not too 3267:detectable from outside code. 2508:From the section on protocols: 1929:Good enough for me. Thanks. -- 1728:would really make it shine. -- 1134:because some people find using 662:I don't know how to fix it. -- 3776:part of standard C. From the 3635:16:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC) 2959:17:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC) 2453:18:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC) 2065:15:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC) 914:was suddenly changed to this: 893:Looking at the history, this: 817:2. "" is an rvalue expression. 1: 4340:07:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC) 4288:14:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 4239:14:33, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 4194:12:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 4163:17:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC) 4145:16:23, 3 September 2014 (UTC) 3899:08:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC) 3873:17:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC) 3859:Blocks (C language extension) 3852:17:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC) 3834:Blocks (C language extension) 3823:17:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC) 3807:Blocks (C language extension) 3799:01:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC) 3755:18:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC) 3713:17:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC) 3677:17:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC) 3373:or would that be incorrect? 3299:06:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC) 3245:#Protocols v. Java Interfaces 3179:08:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC) 3024:23:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC) 2735:"Dynamic" or "Static" typing? 2587:01:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC) 2389:20:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC) 1100:insists on complaining about 290:07:14, 14 November 2004 (UTC) 180:05:36, 12 November 2004 (UTC) 143:01:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC) 4320:15:31, 11 January 2015 (UTC) 3658:16:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC) 3439:14:58, 23 January 2012 (UTC) 3405:10:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC) 3389:23:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC) 3076:02:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 3064:01:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 3049:20:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 2813:01:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 2709:01:49, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 2682:17:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC) 2625:22:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC) 2504:Protocols v. Java Interfaces 2287:02:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC) 2259:20:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2206:08:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2191:08:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2148:08:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2136:08:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2090:07:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2014:08:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 2003:07:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 1446:high-proficiency developers. 1430:08:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 1363:13:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC) 1224:17:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 1211:to your include (cpp) flags. 884:features not found in C. -- 814:1. Method declaration lines, 476:19:24, 5 December 2004 (UTC) 97:22:24, 18 October 2003 (UTC) 3968:01:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC) 3951:01:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC) 3360:Cocoa.) Can I change this: 3326:17:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 2692:for details.) For example, 2652:Dynamic Compilation in Java 2561:23:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC) 2360:11:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC) 1971:19:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC) 1934:19:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC) 1920:18:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC) 1891:04:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC) 1306:12:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC) 1289:11:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC) 1276:02:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC) 1265:21:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC) 1235:02:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC) 310:Getting better all the time 4355: 4173:This post to StackOverflow 3831: 3778:Closure (computer science) 3770:Closure (computer science) 3732:Expanded the main article 3686: 3233:16:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC) 3216:13:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC) 2902:Analysis "of the language" 2730:19:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC) 2431:14:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC) 1856:Claims in analysis section 1341:15:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC) 586:21:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC) 152:Validity of disadvantages? 4122:on some supercomputers). 3920:21:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC) 3606:20:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC) 3283:04:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC) 3200:14:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC) 3139:Not Neutral Point Of View 3134:05:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC) 3114:20:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC) 2921:Available implementations 2890:10:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 2875:Thanks for the link. The 2859:15:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2833:14:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2776:15:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2646:13:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2607:13:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2540:14:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2494:14:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2411:User Manual Not A Article 2405:14:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2303:14:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 2033:14:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 1942:Overloading clarification 1840:07:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 1830:05:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 1802:04:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 1791:04:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 1776:14:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 1712:Obj-C vs. Obj-C libraries 1706:12:28, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 1691:14:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC) 1071:21:39, 29 June 2005 (UTC) 766:Functionally, the same as 754:@implementation Observer 693:@implementation Observer 602:14:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 561:11:54, 8 April 2005 (UTC) 510:12:44, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 493:Anyway, those are my 2c. 352:14:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC) 124:21:03, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC) 112:19:40, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC) 4128:C (programming language) 4041: 3998:"Write Objective-C Code" 3625:Respectfully submitted, 2933:16:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC) 2908:Analysis of the language 2365:Analysis of the language 2333:18:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC) 2318:13:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC) 1950:in the same class (a la 1869:08:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC) 1758:14:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1748:04:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1733:01:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1673:15:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 1668:Glad I could help. :) – 1660:12:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 1643:12:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 1618:12:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 1601:13:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC) 1587:07:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1575:07:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1529:18:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 1479:17:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 1469:Agreed. It's highly POV. 1464:22:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC) 1406:19:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 1081:30 June 2005 02:44 (UTC) 836:19:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 529:08:55, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) 518:00:02, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 444:01:20, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) 337:13:22, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC) 305:07:25, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC) 194:08:56, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC) 4018:with the same semantics 4000:. apple.com. 2013-04-23 3772:. "Block objects" are 3511:15:22, 4 May 2012 (UTC) 3493:17:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 3470:12:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 3411:IS THIS SENTENCE RIGHT? 3092:obj.method(parameter); 2750:16:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 2472:09:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC) 1860:I edited the paragraph 1395:result @= a @* b @+ c; 1022:05:04, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 989:04:52, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 956:04:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 938:04:13, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 889:03:58, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 872:03:46, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 851:03:15, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 722:03:46, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 667:18:24, 2 May 2005 (UTC) 641:09:11, 2 May 2005 (UTC) 626:07:42, 2 May 2005 (UTC) 497:04:32, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) 3475:iOS applications; see 3303:Please take a look at 3257: 2515: 778:id <Notifiable: --> 699:id <Notifiable: --> 608:Only One Syntax Change 570: 301:part of the language. 255:component object model 3736:to include C examples 3534:Sentence by sentence: 3448:On the rise obviously 3252: 2786:Apple's documentation 2667:For one example see: 2510: 2245:comment was added by 2177:comment was added by 2122:comment was added by 2076:comment was added by 2051:comment was added by 1989:comment was added by 1906:comment was added by 1816:comment was added by 1561:comment was added by 1416:comment was added by 1327:comment was added by 1251:comment was added by 1110:comp.lang.objective-c 1057:comment was added by 565: 547:comment was added by 462:comment was added by 276:comment was added by 166:comment was added by 83:comment was added by 42:of past discussions. 2913:"Smalltalk requires" 791:Standard C syntax -- 525:Allright I'll do it 358:In response to Maury 4269:which states that " 4259:selling Objective-C 3766:Block (programming) 3734:Block (programming) 3724:Block (programming) 3584:Xcode in the least. 3261:conformsToProtocol: 3099:method(parameter); 1946:Function or method 1230:Objective-C style. 3037:section, it says, 2976:begin removed text 2906:The first para of 1788:Matthew Stuckwisch 1541:Comparision to C++ 1241:Exception catching 188:downright annoying 4318: 4310: 4286: 4278: 4237: 4229: 4192: 4184: 4143: 4135: 3954: 3937:comment added by 3718:Isn't "blocks" a 3609: 3592:comment added by 3429:comment added by 3379:comment added by 3316:comment added by 3273:comment added by 3169:comment added by 3119:Extension methods 2971:Boolean data type 2949:comment added by 2845:Objective-C uses 2690:runtime reference 2589: 2577:comment added by 2443:comment added by 2433: 2421:comment added by 2391: 2379:comment added by 2261: 2193: 2138: 2092: 2067: 2005: 1922: 1832: 1577: 1527: 1462: 1432: 1365: 1353:comment added by 1343: 1267: 1073: 563: 478: 292: 222:Remote invocation 182: 145: 133:comment added by 99: 67: 66: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4346: 4312: 4308: 4280: 4276: 4261:, and they only 4231: 4227: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4137: 4133: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4109: 4102: 4099: 4096: 4093: 4090: 4087: 4084: 4081: 4078: 4075: 4072: 4069: 4066: 4063: 4060: 4057: 4054: 4051: 4048: 4047:<stdio.h: --> 4045: 4014:formal languages 4008: 4006: 4005: 3953: 3931: 3882: 3692: 3691: 3637:Greg M. Johnson 3608: 3586: 3507: 3466: 3441: 3391: 3356:replacement for 3328: 3308:Patrick Naughton 3285: 3262: 3181: 3011:end removed text 2996: 2992: 2988: 2985:provides a type 2961: 2572: 2455: 2416: 2374: 2240: 2172: 2117: 2071: 2046: 1984: 1901: 1884:reliable sources 1811: 1556: 1521: 1456: 1411: 1348: 1322: 1246: 1052: 802:ending keyword. 542: 514:Yes, of course. 457: 376:Cocoa (software) 271: 249:was fairly rare. 161: 128: 110:Brent Gulanowski 103:Title of article 78: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 18:Talk:Objective-C 4354: 4353: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4345: 4344: 4343: 4332:Daniel.Cardenas 4328: 4176: 4119: 4115: 4111: 4107: 4104: 4103: 4100: 4097: 4094: 4091: 4088: 4085: 4082: 4079: 4076: 4073: 4070: 4067: 4064: 4061: 4058: 4055: 4052: 4049: 4046: 4043: 4003: 4001: 3996: 3976: 3974:Strict superset 3932: 3927: 3907: 3836: 3695: 3694: 3689: 3685: 3643: 3641:What libraries? 3615: 3587: 3521: 3503: 3481:App Store (iOS) 3462: 3450: 3424: 3413: 3374: 3371: 3364: 3334: 3311: 3268: 3260: 3250:The statement: 3241: 3187: 3185:Messaging Speed 3164: 3141: 3121: 3100: 3093: 3086: 3031: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2967: 2944: 2940: 2904: 2882:BrianWilloughby 2825:BrianWilloughby 2737: 2717: 2654: 2638:BrianWilloughby 2599:BrianWilloughby 2568: 2548: 2532:BrianWilloughby 2506: 2486:BrianWilloughby 2438: 2413: 2397:BrianWilloughby 2367: 2345: 2311: 2295:BrianWilloughby 2267: 2241:—The preceding 2232:Apple Computers 2228: 2197:The article is 2173:—The preceding 2170: 2166:here</a: --> 2156: 2118:—The preceding 2115: 2105: 2098: 2072:—The preceding 2047:—The preceding 2043: 2025:BrianWilloughby 1985:—The preceding 1980: 1965: 1958: 1944: 1902:—The preceding 1876: 1858: 1812:—The preceding 1783: 1768:BrianWilloughby 1714: 1698:BrianWilloughby 1683:BrianWilloughby 1557:—The preceding 1543: 1438: 1412:—The preceding 1371: 1323:—The preceding 1318: 1247:—The preceding 1243: 1113:newsgroup FAQ: 1091: 1053:—The preceding 1042: 799: 796: 788: 780: 771: 763: 755: 707: 704: 701: 697: 694: 656: 610: 594:BrianWilloughby 573: 543:-The preceding 538: 504: 502:"Strong Typing" 464:Maury Markowitz 458:—The preceding 360: 344:BrianWilloughby 317:Some comments: 312: 272:—The preceding 262:virtual machine 247:dynamic linking 207:Other features 201: 162:—The preceding 154: 105: 79:—The preceding 75:objective-c.org 72: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4352: 4350: 4327: 4324: 4323: 4322: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4298: 4297: 4296: 4295: 4294: 4293: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4241: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4212: 4211: 4210: 4199: 4198: 4197: 4196: 4166: 4165: 4042: 4029: 4028: 4010: 4009: 3994: 3975: 3972: 3971: 3970: 3926: 3923: 3906: 3903: 3902: 3901: 3887:The Anonymouse 3855: 3854: 3840:The Anonymouse 3837: 3832:Main article: 3826: 3825: 3811:The Anonymouse 3758: 3757: 3743:The Anonymouse 3739: 3738: 3737: 3730: 3687: 3684: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3665:The Anonymouse 3642: 3639: 3614: 3611: 3520: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3449: 3446: 3445: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3431:175.253.27.227 3412: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3368: 3362: 3333: 3330: 3318:93.220.113.109 3240: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3219: 3218: 3186: 3183: 3140: 3137: 3120: 3117: 3097: 3091: 3085: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3030: 3027: 3013: 3008: 3007: 2980: 2979: 2974: 2966: 2963: 2939: 2936: 2903: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2815: 2801: 2795: 2779: 2778: 2768:92.233.195.172 2757: 2756: 2736: 2733: 2716: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2697: 2659: 2658: 2653: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2633: 2610: 2609: 2595: 2567: 2564: 2547: 2546:Naming in lead 2544: 2543: 2542: 2505: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2457: 2456: 2412: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2366: 2363: 2344: 2341: 2336: 2335: 2310: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2266: 2263: 2226: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2209: 2208: 2168: 2155: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2112: 2102: 2097: 2096:Dynamic Typing 2094: 2053:85.126.110.203 2042: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2017: 2016: 1983:isn't needed. 1978: 1975: 1962: 1956: 1943: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1924: 1923: 1875: 1872: 1857: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1807: 1782: 1779: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1713: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1663: 1662: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1645: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1590: 1589: 1542: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1510: 1509: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1497: 1494: 1487: 1486: 1471: 1470: 1449: 1448: 1437: 1434: 1370: 1369:Class Clusters 1367: 1346: 1317: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1279: 1278: 1242: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1213: 1212: 1210: 1204: 1202: 1201: 1198: 1197: 1193: 1191: 1188: 1184: 1160: 1159: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1127: 1126: 1124: 1119: 1112: 1103: 1090: 1089: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1059:203.109.157.73 1041: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 958: 931: 930: 929: 928: 912: 911: 910: 909: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 819: 818: 815: 797: 794: 793: 792: 786: 785: 784: 777: 776: 775: 769: 768: 767: 761: 760: 759: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 746: 745: 744: 743: 731: 730: 729: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 705: 702: 698: 695: 692: 691: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 672: 671: 670: 669: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 644: 643: 609: 606: 605: 604: 571: 537: 534: 533: 532: 531: 530: 527:Wouter Lievens 520: 519: 508:Wouter Lievens 503: 500: 499: 498: 490: 489: 484: 483: 482: 481: 480: 479: 438: 437: 425: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 411: 410: 403: 392: 391: 372: 371: 370: 369: 359: 356: 355: 354: 311: 308: 307: 306: 269: 268: 265: 258: 250: 239: 225: 219: 200: 199:Clarifications 197: 196: 195: 153: 150: 149: 148: 147: 146: 104: 101: 71: 68: 65: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4351: 4342: 4341: 4337: 4333: 4325: 4321: 4316: 4311: 4304: 4303: 4291: 4290: 4289: 4284: 4279: 4272: 4268: 4264: 4260: 4256: 4255: 4254: 4253: 4252: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4240: 4235: 4230: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4218: 4217: 4216: 4209: 4205: 4204: 4203: 4202: 4201: 4200: 4195: 4190: 4185: 4174: 4170: 4169: 4168: 4167: 4164: 4160: 4156: 4155:Frederico1234 4152: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4141: 4136: 4129: 4123: 4118:on a 286, or 4040: 4038: 4034: 4026: 4025: 4024: 4021: 4019: 4015: 3999: 3995: 3992: 3991: 3985: 3984: 3983: 3981: 3973: 3969: 3965: 3961: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3952: 3948: 3944: 3940: 3936: 3924: 3922: 3921: 3917: 3913: 3904: 3900: 3896: 3892: 3888: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3874: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3860: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3838: 3835: 3828: 3827: 3824: 3820: 3816: 3812: 3808: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3800: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3785: 3783: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3767: 3763: 3756: 3752: 3748: 3744: 3740: 3735: 3731: 3728: 3727: 3725: 3721: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3710: 3706: 3702: 3700: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3666: 3662: 3661: 3660: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3647: 3640: 3638: 3636: 3632: 3628: 3623: 3619: 3612: 3610: 3607: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3594:Stevenewright 3591: 3585: 3580: 3579: 3575: 3574: 3569: 3568: 3564: 3563: 3559: 3556: 3555: 3551: 3550: 3546: 3545: 3541: 3540: 3536: 3535: 3531: 3530: 3526: 3525: 3518: 3512: 3508: 3506: 3500: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3467: 3465: 3459: 3455: 3447: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3422: 3418: 3417: 3415: 3414: 3410: 3406: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3390: 3386: 3382: 3378: 3367: 3361: 3359: 3355: 3351: 3347: 3343: 3339: 3331: 3329: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3315: 3309: 3305: 3301: 3300: 3296: 3292: 3286: 3284: 3280: 3276: 3275:208.80.119.67 3272: 3266: 3256: 3251: 3248: 3246: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3221: 3220: 3217: 3213: 3209: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3184: 3182: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3168: 3160: 3156: 3153: 3150: 3147: 3144: 3138: 3136: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3118: 3116: 3115: 3111: 3107: 3103: 3096: 3090: 3083: 3077: 3074: 3071: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3061: 3057: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3047: 3044: 3040: 3036: 3028: 3026: 3025: 3021: 3017: 3012: 3006: 3004: 3000: 2989:, and macros 2984: 2978: 2977: 2972: 2964: 2962: 2960: 2956: 2952: 2951:69.110.27.182 2948: 2937: 2935: 2934: 2930: 2926: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2909: 2901: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2878: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2814: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2799: 2798:laissez faire 2793: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2764: 2759: 2758: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2747: 2743: 2734: 2732: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2722:71.13.148.220 2714: 2710: 2706: 2702: 2698: 2695: 2691: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2679: 2675: 2671: 2670: 2665: 2662: 2656: 2655: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2639: 2634: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2626: 2622: 2618: 2617:173.70.96.132 2614: 2608: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2588: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2565: 2563: 2562: 2558: 2554: 2553:Steven Fisher 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2525: 2519: 2514: 2509: 2503: 2495: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2473: 2469: 2465: 2464:206.75.146.60 2461: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2454: 2450: 2446: 2445:69.110.27.182 2442: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2432: 2428: 2424: 2423:75.210.51.228 2420: 2410: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2390: 2386: 2382: 2378: 2370: 2364: 2362: 2361: 2358: 2353: 2352:the details. 2349: 2342: 2340: 2334: 2330: 2326: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2316: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2291: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2271: 2264: 2262: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2236: 2233: 2225: 2222: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2207: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2167: 2164: 2159: 2153: 2149: 2146: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2121: 2111: 2108: 2101: 2095: 2093: 2091: 2087: 2083: 2079: 2075: 2068: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2050: 2040: 2034: 2030: 2026: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2015: 2012: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1992: 1988: 1977: 1973: 1972: 1969: 1961: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1941: 1935: 1932: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1899: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1889: 1885: 1881: 1873: 1871: 1870: 1867: 1863: 1855: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1838: 1834: 1833: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1808: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1800: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1789: 1780: 1778: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1759: 1756: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1746: 1741: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1731: 1725: 1723: 1717: 1711: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1674: 1671: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1661: 1658: 1654: 1653: 1644: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1619: 1616: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1602: 1599: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1588: 1585: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1553: 1550: 1546: 1540: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1525: 1520: 1519:Allan McInnes 1516: 1512: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1498: 1495: 1492: 1491: 1489: 1488: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1477: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1460: 1455: 1454:Allan McInnes 1447: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1435: 1433: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1408: 1407: 1404: 1399: 1396: 1393: 1390: 1387: 1384: 1381: 1378: 1374: 1368: 1366: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1355:83.241.184.66 1352: 1344: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1329:69.12.192.122 1326: 1315: 1307: 1304: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1290: 1287: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1277: 1274: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1240: 1236: 1233: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1222: 1217: 1216: 1208: 1205: 1203: 1200: 1199: 1195: 1194: 1192: 1189: 1187: 1185: 1183: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1176: 1175:the following 1172: 1169: 1164: 1163: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1146:(in the file 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1129: 1128: 1122: 1120: 1118: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1111: 1108: 1105: 1101: 1099: 1096: 1087: 1085: 1080: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1049: 1045: 1039: 1023: 1020: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1003: 990: 987: 983: 979: 978: 977: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 957: 954: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 945: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 936: 927: 925: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 908: 907: 903: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 891: 890: 887: 873: 870: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 860: 859: 852: 849: 844: 843: 842: 841: 840: 839: 838: 837: 834: 816: 813: 812: 810: 809: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 801: 800: 790: 789: 782: 781: 773: 772: 765: 764: 757: 756: 741: 740: 739: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 723: 720: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 708: 682: 681: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 673: 668: 665: 660: 659: 658: 657: 648: 647: 646: 645: 642: 639: 634: 630: 629: 628: 627: 624: 619: 618: 616: 607: 603: 599: 595: 590: 589: 588: 587: 583: 579: 569: 564: 562: 558: 554: 550: 549:67.161.42.199 546: 535: 528: 524: 523: 522: 521: 517: 513: 512: 511: 509: 501: 496: 492: 491: 486: 485: 477: 473: 469: 465: 461: 455: 454: 452: 451: 450: 447: 446: 445: 443: 435: 434: 433: 431: 418: 417: 415: 414: 413: 412: 408: 404: 401: 397: 396: 395: 389: 388: 387: 385: 381: 377: 367: 366: 365: 364: 363: 357: 353: 349: 345: 340: 339: 338: 336: 332: 329: 326: 322: 318: 315: 309: 304: 300: 295: 294: 293: 291: 287: 283: 279: 275: 266: 263: 259: 256: 251: 248: 244: 240: 237: 233: 229: 226: 223: 220: 217: 216: 215: 213: 208: 205: 198: 193: 189: 185: 184: 183: 181: 177: 173: 169: 165: 157: 151: 144: 140: 136: 132: 126: 125: 123: 119: 115: 114: 113: 111: 102: 100: 98: 94: 90: 86: 82: 76: 69: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4329: 4270: 4267:cocoadev.com 4262: 4177:void id() {} 4124: 4105: 4032: 4030: 4022: 4017: 4011: 4002:. Retrieved 3987: 3977: 3933:— Preceding 3928: 3908: 3883: 3863: 3856: 3789: 3786: 3781: 3773: 3761: 3759: 3703: 3696: 3648: 3644: 3624: 3620: 3616: 3588:— Preceding 3582: 3581: 3577: 3576: 3571: 3570: 3566: 3565: 3561: 3560: 3557: 3553: 3552: 3548: 3547: 3543: 3542: 3538: 3537: 3533: 3532: 3528: 3527: 3523: 3522: 3504: 3463: 3451: 3425:— Preceding 3420: 3381:12.218.76.10 3375:— Preceding 3372: 3365: 3335: 3312:— Preceding 3302: 3287: 3269:— Preceding 3264: 3258: 3253: 3249: 3242: 3188: 3161: 3157: 3154: 3151: 3148: 3145: 3142: 3126:Cheerlessbox 3122: 3106:Elusive Pete 3104: 3101: 3094: 3087: 3038: 3034: 3032: 3029:What is IMP? 3016:Jorge Stolfi 3010: 3009: 3005:also apply. 2981: 2975: 2968: 2941: 2920: 2916: 2912: 2907: 2905: 2797: 2789: 2762: 2738: 2718: 2672: 2666: 2663: 2660: 2615: 2611: 2569: 2549: 2523: 2520: 2516: 2511: 2507: 2414: 2381:128.231.88.5 2371: 2368: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2337: 2312: 2309:Dot notation 2273: 2268: 2237: 2229: 2223: 2219: 2198: 2171: 2160: 2157: 2116: 2109: 2106: 2099: 2069: 2044: 1981: 1974: 1966: 1959: 1945: 1877: 1861: 1859: 1784: 1764: 1739: 1726: 1724:instead... 1718: 1715: 1679: 1635: 1554: 1551: 1547: 1544: 1514: 1485:difference'. 1472: 1450: 1444: 1439: 1409: 1400: 1397: 1394: 1391: 1388: 1385: 1382: 1379: 1375: 1372: 1345: 1319: 1244: 1218: 1215: 1214: 1186: 1181: 1165: 1162: 1161: 1117: 1106: 1094: 1092: 1050: 1046: 1043: 932: 920: 913: 899: 892: 882: 830: 632: 620: 612: 611: 574: 566: 539: 505: 448: 439: 426: 393: 373: 361: 333: 330: 327: 323: 319: 316: 313: 298: 278:64.81.33.177 270: 209: 206: 202: 187: 168:64.81.64.115 158: 155: 106: 73: 60: 43: 37: 4110:in C++ but 3768:... it's a 3366:into this: 3291:24.6.37.253 3171:66.14.154.3 3165:—Preceding 2983:Objective-C 2945:—Preceding 2877:Duck typing 2847:Duck typing 2573:—Preceding 2439:—Preceding 2417:—Preceding 2375:—Preceding 1948:overloading 1638:article. – 1636:Objective-C 1615:71.68.75.61 1584:71.68.75.61 1563:141.3.26.29 1349:—Preceding 1209:-Wno-import 1144:warn_import 1140:-Wno-import 129:—Preceding 85:Minesweeper 36:This is an 4004:2013-12-22 3720:C language 2524:conformsTo 2265:.m vs. .mm 2247:Harveyswik 2179:Harveyswik 2154:Forwarding 2124:Harveyswik 2078:Harveyswik 1991:Harveyswik 1880:verifiable 1738:Archiving 1506:verifiable 1418:Harveyswik 1316:Categories 4271:virtually 4114:in C (or 3982:section: 3978:From the 3627:Pterandon 3497:THX·10³! 3454:THIS LINK 3098:obj-: --> 2579:90.5.7.87 2566:Ownership 2203:Dysprosia 2145:Dysprosia 2011:Dysprosia 1908:Shunpiker 1874:GC and OC 1866:Mikademus 1837:Dysprosia 1799:Dysprosia 1745:Dysprosia 1403:Keybounce 1303:Dysprosia 1273:Dysprosia 1232:Dysprosia 1079:Dysprosia 1019:Dysprosia 953:Dysprosia 848:Dysprosia 833:Keybounce 638:Dysprosia 516:Dysprosia 495:Dysprosia 488:anyway ;) 442:Iluvcapra 430:Smalltalk 407:Smalltalk 303:Dysprosia 232:debugging 228:Swizzling 192:Dysprosia 135:90.5.7.87 61:Archive 1 4309:VVERTYVS 4277:VVERTYVS 4228:VVERTYVS 4183:VVERTYVS 4134:VVERTYVS 4044:#include 3990:superset 3947:contribs 3935:unsigned 3895:contribs 3848:contribs 3819:contribs 3751:contribs 3693:Resolved 3673:contribs 3602:contribs 3590:unsigned 3501:dixit. ( 3460:dixit. ( 3427:unsigned 3377:unsigned 3370:instead. 3358:non-free 3354:software 3314:unsigned 3271:unsigned 3192:NJ-JohnE 3167:unsigned 3070:RoySmith 3043:RoySmith 3035:Messages 2947:unsigned 2575:unsigned 2441:unsigned 2419:unsigned 2377:unsigned 2325:lensovet 2315:Ddfreyne 2279:lensovet 2255:contribs 2243:unsigned 2187:contribs 2175:unsigned 2132:contribs 2120:unsigned 2086:contribs 2074:unsigned 2061:contribs 2049:unsigned 1999:contribs 1987:unsigned 1916:contribs 1904:unsigned 1826:contribs 1814:unsigned 1722:OpenStep 1657:DarelRex 1598:DarelRex 1571:contribs 1559:unsigned 1476:DarelRex 1426:contribs 1414:unsigned 1351:unsigned 1337:contribs 1325:unsigned 1261:contribs 1249:unsigned 1171:user FAQ 1166:But the 1086:GCC and 1067:contribs 1055:unsigned 615:keywords 578:Richwalt 557:contribs 545:unsigned 472:contribs 460:unsigned 286:contribs 274:unsigned 176:contribs 164:unsigned 131:unsigned 93:contribs 81:unsigned 4326:license 3988:strict 3939:Kaydell 3477:iOS_SDK 3342:GNUstep 3239:Dubious 3033:In the 2763:pointer 2742:Renesis 2041:Infobox 1968:Engelec 1221:magetoo 1168:GNUstep 1152:#ifndef 1136:#import 1132:#import 1123:#import 1102:#import 1088:#import 680:all C. 243:library 39:archive 4092:return 4080:sizeof 4062:printf 4033:syntax 3980:Syntax 3960:Thea10 3865:Tzadik 3791:Tzadik 3705:Tzadik 3499:Rursus 3458:Rursus 3397:1exec1 3306:where 3225:Jrajav 3208:Jrajav 3073:(talk) 3046:(talk) 2925:Rursus 2694:PyObjC 1743:time. 1670:Mipadi 1640:Mipadi 1156:#endif 1148:cccp.c 982:syntax 779:*ptr; 700:*ptr; 633:really 70:Domain 4263:state 3986:is a 3912:Itsme 3884:Added 3485:Rostz 3350:libre 3338:bold, 2929:bork² 2851:Hcobb 2674:Hcobb 2627:Raf. 2357:Scode 2165:: --> 1882:from 1818:Guifa 1286:Pdemb 1253:Pdemb 1173:says 986:Dpark 935:Dpark 886:Dpark 869:Dpark 798:@end 719:Dpark 706:@end 664:Dpark 623:Dpark 378:, or 335:Maury 116:Read 16:< 4336:talk 4159:talk 4068:"%zu 4053:main 3964:talk 3943:talk 3916:talk 3891:talk 3869:talk 3844:talk 3815:talk 3795:talk 3747:talk 3709:talk 3669:talk 3654:talk 3650:Wjl2 3631:talk 3598:talk 3505:bork 3489:talk 3479:and 3464:bork 3435:talk 3401:talk 3385:talk 3346:free 3322:talk 3295:talk 3279:talk 3229:talk 3212:talk 3196:talk 3175:talk 3130:talk 3110:talk 3060:talk 3020:talk 2993:and 2987:BOOL 2955:talk 2886:talk 2855:talk 2829:talk 2809:talk 2772:talk 2746:talk 2726:talk 2715:C97? 2705:talk 2688:the 2678:talk 2642:talk 2621:talk 2603:talk 2583:talk 2557:talk 2536:talk 2490:talk 2468:talk 2449:talk 2427:talk 2401:talk 2385:talk 2329:talk 2299:talk 2283:talk 2251:talk 2183:talk 2128:talk 2082:talk 2057:talk 2029:talk 1995:talk 1912:talk 1822:talk 1772:talk 1702:talk 1687:talk 1567:talk 1524:talk 1459:talk 1422:talk 1359:talk 1333:talk 1257:talk 1154:and 1063:talk 980:The 598:talk 582:talk 553:talk 468:talk 380:NeXT 348:talk 299:also 282:talk 212:NeXT 172:talk 139:talk 122:Stan 89:talk 4315:hm? 4283:hm? 4234:hm? 4189:hm? 4140:hm? 4089:)); 4086:'a' 4050:int 4037:C++ 3774:not 3762:not 3509:!) 3468:!) 2991:YES 2790:can 2699:-- 2199:not 1952:C++ 1931:cmh 1888:cmh 1781:POV 1755:cmh 1730:cmh 1098:GCC 1095:why 924:C++ 906:C++ 904:or 400:C++ 236:EOF 4338:) 4179:. 4161:) 4130:. 4071:\n 4056:() 3966:) 3949:) 3945:• 3918:) 3897:) 3893:• 3871:) 3850:) 3846:• 3821:) 3817:• 3809:. 3797:) 3784:. 3764:a 3753:) 3749:• 3711:) 3675:) 3671:• 3656:) 3633:) 3604:) 3600:• 3491:) 3483:. 3437:) 3421:or 3403:) 3387:) 3352:) 3324:) 3297:) 3281:) 3265:is 3231:) 3214:) 3198:) 3177:) 3132:) 3112:) 3062:) 3022:) 3001:, 2995:NO 2957:) 2931:) 2915:, 2888:) 2857:) 2831:) 2811:) 2803:-- 2794:id 2774:) 2748:) 2728:) 2707:) 2680:) 2644:) 2623:) 2605:) 2585:) 2559:) 2538:) 2492:) 2470:) 2451:) 2429:) 2403:) 2387:) 2355:-- 2331:– 2301:) 2285:– 2272:, 2257:) 2253:• 2189:) 2185:• 2134:) 2130:• 2088:) 2084:• 2063:) 2059:• 2031:) 2001:) 1997:• 1918:) 1914:• 1900:) 1845:C. 1828:) 1824:• 1774:) 1740:is 1704:) 1689:) 1596:-- 1573:) 1569:• 1428:) 1424:• 1361:) 1339:) 1335:• 1263:) 1259:• 1177:: 1069:) 1065:• 831:-- 600:) 584:) 559:) 555:• 474:) 470:• 440:-- 350:) 288:) 284:• 178:) 174:• 141:) 95:) 91:• 4334:( 4317:) 4313:( 4307:Q 4285:) 4281:( 4275:Q 4236:) 4232:( 4226:Q 4191:) 4187:( 4181:Q 4157:( 4142:) 4138:( 4132:Q 4120:8 4116:2 4112:4 4108:1 4101:} 4098:; 4095:0 4083:( 4077:, 4074:" 4065:( 4059:{ 4007:. 3962:( 3941:( 3914:( 3889:( 3867:( 3842:( 3813:( 3793:( 3745:( 3707:( 3667:( 3652:( 3629:( 3596:( 3487:( 3433:( 3399:( 3383:( 3348:( 3320:( 3293:( 3277:( 3227:( 3210:( 3194:( 3173:( 3128:( 3108:( 3058:( 3018:( 2999:C 2973:: 2953:( 2927:( 2884:( 2853:( 2827:( 2807:( 2770:( 2744:( 2724:( 2703:( 2676:( 2640:( 2619:( 2601:( 2581:( 2555:( 2534:( 2488:( 2466:( 2447:( 2425:( 2399:( 2383:( 2327:– 2297:( 2281:– 2277:— 2249:( 2181:( 2126:( 2080:( 2055:( 2027:( 1993:( 1910:( 1820:( 1770:( 1700:( 1685:( 1565:( 1526:) 1522:( 1508:. 1461:) 1457:( 1420:( 1357:( 1331:( 1255:( 1125:? 1061:( 926:. 902:C 617:. 596:( 580:( 551:( 466:( 409:. 402:. 384:C 346:( 280:( 257:. 170:( 137:( 87:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index