On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 19:40:27 -0400, Scott Anguish <sc...@cocoadoc.com> said: >If it isn't documented as being KVO compliant it is best not to assume it is guaranteed to be in the future. > > >On Jun 21, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Matt Neuburg wrote: > >> But how is the user supposed to know this? Or is the user who discovers this >> supposed to ignore it?
Thanks, Scott. This is what I was afraid the answer might be. But gosh, this sort of KVO compliance is awfully useful, esp. on iPhone where there are no bindings, no user defaults controller, etc. It's really a pity not to be allowed to use it. If there's time and you could blip the engineering folks to double-check this it would be very cool (I understand if there isn't time). Tx again - m. -- matt neuburg, phd = m...@tidbits.com, <http://www.tidbits.com/matt/> A fool + a tool + an autorelease pool = cool! AppleScript: the Definitive Guide - Second Edition! http://www.tidbits.com/matt/default.html#applescriptthings _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
