Objective-C isn't what you think it is

Re:Objective-C isn't what you think it is by stcredzero on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @02:39PM (#7307103)

Whichever kind you do, it just has to be optimized for reading the code, not be a leaky abstraction, and stay out of the way of debugging. Static meta programming can be bad in all these ways as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Objective-C isn't what you think it is by Pxtl on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @02:45PM (#7307149)

I've found that static metaprogramming produces an odd middle-ground. The intermediate code can be wonderfully legible and this lets you quickly find bugs... but when it comes time to fix the bug you have to go into the original generating code and then you find an absolute horror.

In this case I'm referring to C# T4.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Objective-C isn't what you think it is by swift on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @03:27PM (#7307450)

Visual Studio doesn't exactly treat T4 as a first-class language, which is a shame. Debugging it is much harder than it should be. I've found that it's frankly easier just to write your code generation in C# itself as an extra build phase.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Objective-C isn't what you think it is by jaegerpicker on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @04:11PM (#7307847)

I wish I could vote this up many many times. Code first EF for c# is much nicer IMO.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Objective-C isn't what you think it is by Peaker on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @06:41PM (#7309121)

OTOH, bugs in auto-generated code are much less common.

[ Parent | on HN ]