Design Element
Comment on "The Year in Mac Development"
by Matt Tavares — Jan 01
Well I now respect objective-c properties a little bit more.

But in theory my example should work, if "object" is an objective-c object, "this" is a property of "object", "that" is an ivar of "this", "something" is a property of "that", and "somethingElse" is an ivar of "something". Confusing I know, but this just demonstrates how properties can become ambiguous when in the mix with objective-c objects, structs, other properties, and even c++ classes.

Objective-c already has a great way of accessing object data where nesssary, accessors make code more readable, and in the event that you need to access a path you can just use: [object valueForKeyPath:@"..."].

Properties are a nice addition to objective-c, i'll admit, but there are so many better things that should come before properties. Blocks, operators, and stl compatibility would add miles more of a difference than properties. Which just goes to show that Apple still thinks the world revolves around C.

Objective-C is a wonderfull programming language, but apple has to set its priorities straight (I mean c'mon, they are just adding garbage collection now when it was "supposed" be available in 10.4).

Regardless, thank you for your insight on objc properties.
Back to "The Year in Mac Development"
Design Element

Copyright © Scott Stevenson 2004-2015