Re: Help Indexing

Help index seems fine, and I finally tried on a fresh Mac (with a newer OS version at that) and no joy there either. At this point, since it is really only one of these anchors to a page of help anyway, I am thinking I will rework to name the files what I was previously calling the anchors and

Re: Translating KVO-ed property to Swift

> On Apr 24, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Quincey Morris > wrote: > > On Apr 24, 2017, at 10:11 , Charles Srstka > wrote: >> >> What Quincey seemed to be referring to was a property that was not backed by >> any kind of persistent value. > > That wasn’t actually the kin

Re: iOS "library" unit test of iOS code?

Also, in this case, it can be a macOS thing; the code should run equally well, assuming the dylib I depend on can load (it might've been built against the iOS SDK). > On Apr 24, 2017, at 15:48 , Jens Alfke wrote: > > >> On Apr 24, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Rick Mann wrote: >> >> I'm trying to test

Re: iOS "library" unit test of iOS code?

> On Apr 24, 2017, at 15:48 , Jens Alfke wrote: > > >> On Apr 24, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Rick Mann wrote: >> >> I'm trying to test some code that's entirely stand-alone from my app, and in >> fact I'm having trouble testing it within my app because the app does some >> things that interfere. >>

Re: iOS "library" unit test of iOS code?

> On Apr 24, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Rick Mann wrote: > > I'm trying to test some code that's entirely stand-alone from my app, and in > fact I'm having trouble testing it within my app because the app does some > things that interfere. > > So, I tried creating a new test target and specifying "Non

iOS "library" unit test of iOS code?

I'm trying to test some code that's entirely stand-alone from my app, and in fact I'm having trouble testing it within my app because the app does some things that interfere. So, I tried creating a new test target and specifying "None" for the Test Host, then adding the files needed to the new

Re: Translating KVO-ed property to Swift

On Apr 24, 2017, at 10:11 , Charles Srstka wrote: > > What Quincey seemed to be referring to was a property that was not backed by > any kind of persistent value. That wasn’t actually the kind of property I had in mind. I was thinking of settable, computed properties that did not depend on the

Re: Translating KVO-ed property to Swift

> On Apr 24, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Richard Charles wrote: > >> >> On Apr 23, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Charles Srstka > > wrote: >> >>> On Apr 20, 2017, at 3:06 PM, Quincey Morris >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> Where I disagree is in

Re: Translating KVO-ed property to Swift

> On Apr 23, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Charles Srstka wrote: > >> On Apr 20, 2017, at 3:06 PM, Quincey Morris >> wrote: >> >> Where I disagree is in your much stronger claim that a computed property is >> *necessarily* a dependent property. I think this is just false. The Swift >> distinction betw