[Mono-osx] MacOS bindings and MonoDevelop.

[David Rivera]

I say MonObjc as well.  Its very easy to use, the documentation is nice and
easy to follow, seems to be very well supported, and the use of IB is great.

+1 from me on MonObjc

-David Rivera


duanew wrote:
> 
> Yes MonObjc is the logical choice.  I did find that its memory consumption
> was higher than mobjc, http://code.google.com/p/mobjc/.  Both MonObjc and
> mobjc are easy to use and integrate with.  No offense, but I found
> NObjective harder to use.
> 
> And ideally one of the end goals would be for MonoDevelop to utilize this
> standard bridge as well as developing a tight integration with Interface
> Builder.  The best Mono apps on Mac need to have IB as the GUI design
> tool.
> It can be done today of course but making it straightforward would bring
> even more Mono developers to the Mac.
> 
> To me, Laurent, Jesse and Eugeny need to consolidate their efforts.  I
> know
> it is no fun to compromise but that would be the ideal solution.  MonObjc
> could be enhanced by the efforts of Jesse and Eugeny.
> 
> So I would suggest MonObjc and hope that the others put their efforts into
> improving MonObjc.
> 
> Duane
> 
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Miguel de Icaza <miguel at novell.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello folks,
>>
>>    We are at an interesting point in the life of Mono on OSX.
>>
>>    I want to discuss two topics
>>
>> BINDINGS
>>
>>    We at Novell are still shipping the old Cocoa# that is no longer
>> being actively developed or maintained and in the meantime three
>> bindings have been created.
>>
>>    I took a look at MonObjc this weekend and the docs were great, the
>> source code pretty and the community seems active.
>>
>>    I know there are two other bindings (one from Jesse I believe, and
>> one that uses some static bindings that is supposed to be very fast).
>>
>>    We do not plan on spending any resources (Novell) on Cocoa# at this
>> point, but we will continue to ship the library for folks that might
>> have taken a dependency on it and expect it to be part of Mono.
>>
>>    But we would like to encourage/recommend one of the new frameworks
>> for Mono, and we would love to see MonoDevelop templates so folks doing
>> OSX-only apps can get up and running in no time.
>>
>>    Is there any reason why we can not merge the "best of" each
>> framework into MonObjc which seems to have an active and vibrant
>> community?
>>
>> MONODEVELOP
>>
>>    In addition to the templates for the bindings (which each binding
>> could provide;   We would just have to make it so that MonoDevelop can
>> locate those templates installed by other frameworks).
>>
>>    But additionally, if we add support for Interface Builder, we should
>> probably be thinking how can we map interface builder outlets and map
>> those to code-behind or partial classes to give folks automatically
>> support for intellisense for any outlets/objects created.
>>
>>    The Silverlight and ASP.NET setups depend on this to improve
>> intellisense.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Miguel.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mono-osx mailing list
>> Mono-osx at lists.ximian.com
>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-osx
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-osx mailing list
> Mono-osx at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-osx
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/MacOS-bindings-and-MonoDevelop.-tp23488499p23510287.html
Sent from the Mono - OSX mailing list archive at Nabble.com.