On Jun 16, 2008, at 1:54 PM, Brian Stevens wrote: > On Jun 16, 2008, at 8:37 AM, H. Gluender wrote: > >> BTW and with respect to the latest rumors, shouldn't we think about >> FBtoOC or FBtoJ cross-compilation? (Maybe this idea is a no no yet >> but the times they are changing...) > > The idea is a good one and certainly one the FBtoC team has > discussed. The other theoretical possibility is C===> Obj-C instead > of FB===> Obj-C. There might already be a tool or procedure to do > this since many CodeWarrier C programmers had to convert their C > code to Obj-C. FBtoC's production of C code gives us more options. I can't picture how FBtoC (or C) to Obj-C would work. Obj-C is not a language in itself. It is a very thin layer of messaging syntax on top of C. The only special thing about it is that it allows the programmer to create and manipulate objects and the ability for them to send messages to each other. Otherwise, it's just C. Of course, within an Obj-C program, you can write just plain C because Obj-C is a superset of C. But the important part of Obj-C is the object-oriented nature of it, not the syntax. You can call any C program Objective-C and be correct, but that doesn't really do anything for you. FBtoC takes one procedural language and converts it to another one. But to move to object oriented is not a conversion--it's a totally different way of doing things. Unless I am misunderstanding what is being said here.