Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread James Merkel
Fri, 02 Mar 2012 16:00:41 +0900 On John Joyce wrote: > I have to agree with Gene. I wasn't going to acknowledge this thread, but it > is good to hear more than just people moaning. > > The initial adjustment to 4.x was jarring, but once you get used to the > changes, they're mostly great! > To

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment - AppleScript

2012-03-02 Thread Alex Zavatone
Sorry, "I wrote". Not "I writing". On Mar 2, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Alex Zavatone wrote: > While at Verizon (A big phone and now TV company in the US) I writing a GUI > creation system that took structured designs in Illustrator and Photoshop and > ended up creating __

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment - AppleScript

2012-03-02 Thread Alex Zavatone
On Mar 2, 2012, at 3:25 AM, Uli Kusterer wrote: > On 01.03.2012, at 06:26, Alex Zavatone wrote: >> Makes me wonder how AppleScript is still alive at Apple then. What, are >> there two people on it internally or only one? > > Apple tried to kill AppleScript ages ago. But some big groups of user

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread vincent habchi
> not everyone uses Xcode. I vaguely remember hearing that the Kernel folks > mainly use Makefiles. Which makes sense considering how much of that is open > source, cross-platform etc. I recently bought a book on OpenCL partly written by some guy at Apple (can’t remember the title right now sin

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread Zac Bowling
Here is my theory… I know that Xcode is used internally at Apple, but not always the same versions we get. I know that Xcode 3.x was still used internally by a lot of teams for some time after Xcode 4.x was pushed on us in the consumer side. Now that Xcode 4.3 is pushing LLDB on us with proje

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread Uli Kusterer
On 01.03.2012, at 06:26, Alex Zavatone wrote: > Makes me wonder how AppleScript is still alive at Apple then. What, are > there two people on it internally or only one? Apple tried to kill AppleScript ages ago. But some big groups of users (e.g. pre-press) use it so extensively to automate the

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread Uli Kusterer
On 01.03.2012, at 15:01, George Toledo wrote: > Does anyone require devs at Apple to use Xcode 4, or conform to the broken > technologies that are foisted upon outside Developers? I don't know... > totally rhetorical, but I'd hope not, because as bad as it is to have this > put upon us, I'd hate

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-02 Thread Uli Kusterer
On 02.03.2012, at 03:24, Todd Heberlein wrote: > I did find the switch from 3.x to 4.x jarring, but I have adjusted. > > I am still using Version 4.1, and for me it has been fairly stable. Are the > instability issues everyone is complaining about more with versions 4.2 and > 4.3? That's bee

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Robert Monaghan
Hi Wade, Many of Apple's other products are pretty solid. Its a shame that XCode 4 is pretty unstable. XCode 3.2.6 -might- crash once every 2 to 3 months, Xcode 4.2 -will- crash about once an hour. I am not even interested in trying Xcode 4.3. This reminds me of how bad Microsoft Office used to

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread John Joyce
> >> Man I don't know why there is soo much hate towards v4... but I personally >> love it. I think it's one of the best IDE's available on any platform. Yes >> there are bugs... but there are bugs in every IDE. Go try and use Visual >> Studio. Gah. >> >> To be honest, it seems that the majority

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Preston Sumner
On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:27 PM, Gene Crucean wrote: > Man I don't know why there is soo much hate towards v4... but I personally > love it. I think it's one of the best IDE's available on any platform. Yes > there are bugs... but there are bugs in every IDE. Go try and use Visual > Studio. Gah. > > T

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Dave Keck
> *No*. I've said it before (right here) and I'll say it again; this is *not* > jumping to the documentation, and it is *not* doing what Xcode 3 did. It > switches to the documentation window and it enters the double-clicked word > into the search field, and it does the search, but it doesn'

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Ian Joyner
outside Developers? I don't know... >> totally rhetorical, but I'd hope not, because as bad as it is to have this >> put upon us, I'd hate to think they're using this trash across the board. >> >> -gt >> >>> Message: 4 >>>

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Todd Heberlein
On Mar 1, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Gene Crucean wrote: > Man I don't know why there is soo much hate towards v4... I did find the switch from 3.x to 4.x jarring, but I have adjusted. I am still using Version 4.1, and for me it has been fairly stable. Are the instability issues everyone is complaining

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread Gene Crucean
> To: Matt Neuburg > > Cc: "cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com" , Joar > > Wingfors > > Subject: Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII > > > >> *No*. I've said it before (right h

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread George Toledo
ade Tregaskis > To: Matt Neuburg > Cc: "cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com" , Joar > Wingfors > Subject: Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII > >> *No*. I've said it before (right here) and I'll sa

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-03-01 Thread H. Miersch
> Xcode is used exhaustively within Apple, makes you think that they have an incentive to get it right, right? so what's the problem? ___ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-02-29 Thread Alex Zavatone
On Feb 29, 2012, at 7:41 PM, Wade Tregaskis wrote: >> *No*. I've said it before (right here) and I'll say it again; this is *not* >> jumping to the documentation, and it is *not* doing what Xcode 3 did. It >> switches to the documentation window and it enters the double-clicked word >> into th

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-02-29 Thread Wade Tregaskis
> *No*. I've said it before (right here) and I'll say it again; this is *not* > jumping to the documentation, and it is *not* doing what Xcode 3 did. It > switches to the documentation window and it enters the double-clicked word > into the search field, and it does the search, but it doesn'

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-02-29 Thread Matt Neuburg
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:28:31 -0800, Matt Neuburg said: >> >> On 28 feb 2012, at 22:26, Lee Ann Rucker wrote: >> >> > Plus there's no [...] jump to documentation. >> >> >> Is too! >> >> Option+DoubleClick >> > >*No*. Sorry, wrong list. m. -- matt neuburg, phd = m...@tidbits.com,

Re: Xcode - An Apple Embarrassment

2012-02-29 Thread Matt Neuburg
> > On 28 feb 2012, at 22:26, Lee Ann Rucker wrote: > > > Plus there's no [...] jump to documentation. > > > Is too! > > Option+DoubleClick > *No*. I've said it before (right here) and I'll say it again; this is *not* jumping to the documentation, and it is *not* doing what Xcode 3 di