>  Cocoa is a higher level toolkit than Carbon.  Tk wants to get it's grubby paws on
>  events much closer to the "raw" state than the Cocoa model allows you to easily do.
>  OTOH, Carbon is a pretty low-level toolkit.  So it was a better match for Tk.  That's why
>  when we were originally doing the Mac OS X port I decided to go with Carbon rather
>  than rewriting it in Cocoa.

This is true to an extent, but doesn't tell the whole story.  I
maintain a Cocoa port of GNU Emacs.  There's also a Carbon port.
Comparing the two, the Carbon one definitely matches the X and W32
ports more closely in terms of how it is organized.  But Cocoa does
let you get low-level enough where needed (emacs core manages its own
event and GUI update loops, the emacs window is implemented under
Cocoa as essentially a canvas, etc.).  And in the end the port
codebase for Cocoa is around 1/2 the lines of Carbon, so the
high-level aspect can help as well.

That said, the Objective-C barrier, plus the huge and expanding base
of existing Carbon apps, makes it hard to believe Carbon could go
away.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Tcl-mac mailing list
tcl-mac@[...].net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-mac