Re: CVS HEAD fails to build on OSX 10.4 (macterm.c broken?)

[YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>]

>>>>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:02:47 -0400, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> said:

>> A port that supports GNUstep is much better than one which doesn't.
>> So unless we want to support both, we should prefer the Cocoa/GNUstep
>> port.

>     They would not conflict/compete with each other at least immediately.
>     The former targets Emacs 22, and the latter Emacs 23.

> I have lost you -- which one is "former" and which one is "latter"?

The former is the Carbon+AppKit port I'm recently developing on Emacs
22.  It shares non-UI platform-specific code with the existing Carbon
port.  More precisely, the Carbon+AppKit port is created by moving the
existing UI-specific Carbon code (< 7000 lines) to a new file
mactoolbox.c, and adding new files macappkit.h and macappkit.m for
UI-specific Cocoa code (< 6000 lines) written in Objective-C.

The latter is the Cocoa/GNUstep port, developed by Adrian Robert et
al. on Emacs 23.  It doesn't share any platform-specific code with the
existing one.  The new code is about 14000 lines in total as of the
latest version released in December 2006.  It is available from
http://emacs-app.sourceforge.net/.  The author said a new version is
in preparation.

> Any new port could only be considered for Emacs 23.  So if one is
> aimed at Emacs 22, it would need to be upgraded to 23.

The Carbon+AppKit port is not strictly a new port, but can be seen as
a variant of the Carbon port.  That's one of the reasons I put such a
name.  The Carbon+AppKit port provides the same feature sets and
shares most of the code with the existing Carbon port.

The primary reason that I made the Carbon+AppKit port is that the
Carbon port has no chance to go 64-bit, because 64-bit support of the
UI portions in Carbon will not be provided.  This fact was made public
in June 2007 and people had believed that Carbon (including UI
portions) would go 64-bit until then.

Of course, it is possible to upgrade the Carbon+AppKit port to Emacs
23.  It is no harder than upgrading the Carbon port because the
difference between two "ports" is only in the UI part that gets
minimal impact from the transition from Emacs 22 to Emacs 23.  But I
think it will not be late to do so after evaluating the two ports that
use Cocoa (i.e., Carbon+AppKit and Cocoa/GNUstep) from various
aspects.

				     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
				mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp