Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 495 posts

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#31

Post by slillibri »

WilliamLP wrote: post #18

> Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine Controlling programmers like this seems positively insane, doesn't it? Does this mean that games can't do scripting in something like Lua either, under the letter of Apple's law?

Scripting would already be covered under the rule 3.3.2, ' No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple’s Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s).'

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#32

Post by spolsky »

aheilbut wrote: post #22

In principle, couldn't any of these translation layers be converted to code generators that would produce compiled Obj-C that would fall within the rules? Surely they aren't saying that all code has to be entirely hand-written? If so, then is running search-and-replace on a source file not allowed?

the wording says "Applications must be ORIGINALLY written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript"

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#33

Post by gte910h »

pg wrote: post #14

I don't like this at all. Maybe they only meant to hit Flash, and maybe not, but as written this is in direct opposition to one of the most important principles of software development. Apple themselves must have benefited countless times from writing software in layers. But no layer above their layers is permitted? I wonder if the open source world can successfully fight back, by making compilers that generate code…

Yeah, the "no compatibility layers" bullshit is just that, bullshit.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#34

Post by [deleted] »

api wrote: post #15
icey wrote: post #8

I don't really have a politically correct way to say this: What a horseshit maneuver by Apple.

I have been a very loyal mac user for years and love it, but I'm seriously considering going back to Linux. I am not a free software "zealot" and don't mind some closed-ness, but this is getting absolutely insane. Enforcing which LANGUAGES can be used on a platform?!? Insane! Edit: I've been looking at these guys: http://www.system76.com/ (I don't work with or have any vested interest in them, but they look cool.)

[deleted]

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#38

Post by cmars232 »

Wow, this could also ban iPhone apps from using Scheme (http://jlongster.com/blog/2009/06/17/write-apps-iphone-schem...) or maybe even model-driven tools (http://code.google.com/p/iphonical/).

Telling developers which languages to use? Might as well stick with enterprise software development, more innovation going on over there Apple!

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#39

Post by paulsmith »

Putting aside the intention of this agreement which does seem targeted at the Flash-to-iPhone compiler, this just seems overly broad and silly from a "how things work" point of view.

Let's say I write an iPhone app originally in Scheme (like this guy did: http://jlongster.com/blog/2009/06/17/write-apps-iphone-schem...), and compile it down to C, which is then compiled to object code and linked against the iPhone libraries. At this point, the object code is the same (or functionally the same in terms of its syscalls, library calls, and general program flow) as if I had originally written it in C, except that I would have lost the unique developer efficiencies I got from using Scheme in the first place. I'm not saying Scheme is better or should be an officially sanctioned source language for the iPhone SDK. I'm just saying, where the rubber meets the road -- object code linking against libraries and making certain calls -- there is no difference to the computer what the original source was.

Seems very silly.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#40

Post by _delirium »

aheilbut wrote: post #22

In principle, couldn't any of these translation layers be converted to code generators that would produce compiled Obj-C that would fall within the rules? Surely they aren't saying that all code has to be entirely hand-written? If so, then is running search-and-replace on a source file not allowed?

The contract does say that the app has to be "originally" written in Obj-C, C, C++, or Javascript, so it seems that technically an app that's written in something else and then translated to Obj-C by a code generator would violate the restriction. It's not clear how easy that'd be to enforce, though.
Post reply on HN