hxcpp and the iphone

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

hxcpp and the iphone

hosey hosey
OS4 iPhone Developer Program License Agreement:
Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.

It seems this would not exclude hxcpp because it translates haxe to CPP which then compiles to iphone app?  Or maybe it would? Any thoughts?


Hosey

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Juan Delgado
The actual bit of the new agreement:

"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:49 PM, hosey hosey <[hidden email]> wrote:

> OS4 iPhone Developer Program License Agreement:
> Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
> It seems this would not exclude hxcpp because it translates haxe to CPP
> which then compiles to iphone app?  Or maybe it would? Any thoughts?
>
> Hosey
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>



--
Juan Delgado - Zárate
http://zarate.tv
http://blog.zarate.tv

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Viktor Hesselbom
Apple is a horribly sneaky company. Yuck!

2010/4/8 Juan Delgado <[hidden email]>
The actual bit of the new agreement:

"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:49 PM, hosey hosey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> OS4 iPhone Developer Program License Agreement:
> Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
> It seems this would not exclude hxcpp because it translates haxe to CPP
> which then compiles to iphone app?  Or maybe it would? Any thoughts?
>
> Hosey
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>



--
Juan Delgado - Zárate
http://zarate.tv
http://blog.zarate.tv

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
I don't think there's going to be a real problem, as there is no way to prove it hasn't been written in CPP. You've got the source code, you've used their compiler.

My understanding is that they'll be using automatic checkers that look for telltale signs of things like LLVM which supposedly have certain fingerfrints. I know that to the letter of the law you probably can't go HaXe->CPP->iPhone, but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.

The thing that interests me the most is that things like PhoneGap (a wrapper for Safari that adds Javascript APIs) are likely to be outlawed as well: "Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"!

Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
_______________________

Touch My Pixel
http://www.touchmypixel.com/
phone: +61 3 8060 5321
_______________________


On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Viktor Hesselbom <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apple is a horribly sneaky company. Yuck!

2010/4/8 Juan Delgado <[hidden email]>

The actual bit of the new agreement:

"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:49 PM, hosey hosey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> OS4 iPhone Developer Program License Agreement:
> Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
> It seems this would not exclude hxcpp because it translates haxe to CPP
> which then compiles to iphone app?  Or maybe it would? Any thoughts?
>
> Hosey
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>



--
Juan Delgado - Zárate
http://zarate.tv
http://blog.zarate.tv

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Tony Polinelli
It is a concern - 

haxe could be seen as a (complex) preprocessor - as it is simply arranging the c++ code (in a quite complex way) - too much of a stretch? I think we have the best chance of surviving this out of CS5, Unity, MonoTouch etc. Since the project is fully compiled from c++ & objc - not crosscompiled from any other language (a now illegal language)

Unity for instance generates ARM assembly code, which is linked in (i think) so it is not producing a full "source" application which is compiled by xcode. hxcpp does produce a static link library xx.a for linking in xcode - maybe the full source could be compiled here - i dont think it makes much difference however. 

It will be interesting to see what happens to all of the other projects targeting iphone. 



On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Tarwin Stroh-Spijer <[hidden email]> wrote:
I don't think there's going to be a real problem, as there is no way to prove it hasn't been written in CPP. You've got the source code, you've used their compiler.

My understanding is that they'll be using automatic checkers that look for telltale signs of things like LLVM which supposedly have certain fingerfrints. I know that to the letter of the law you probably can't go HaXe->CPP->iPhone, but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.

The thing that interests me the most is that things like PhoneGap (a wrapper for Safari that adds Javascript APIs) are likely to be outlawed as well: "Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"!

Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
_______________________

Touch My Pixel
http://www.touchmypixel.com/
phone: +61 3 8060 5321
_______________________



On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Viktor Hesselbom <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apple is a horribly sneaky company. Yuck!

2010/4/8 Juan Delgado <[hidden email]>

The actual bit of the new agreement:

"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:49 PM, hosey hosey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> OS4 iPhone Developer Program License Agreement:
> Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
> It seems this would not exclude hxcpp because it translates haxe to CPP
> which then compiles to iphone app?  Or maybe it would? Any thoughts?
>
> Hosey
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>



--
Juan Delgado - Zárate
http://zarate.tv
http://blog.zarate.tv

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org



--
Tony Polinelli
http://touchmypixel.com

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Hugh Sanderson-2
In reply to this post by hosey hosey
"Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary  
translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"

Library? You are not allowed to use a library?  But what is an  
"Application" if not a series of translation layers?

It is interesting to see where this goes.  The difference between hxcpp  
and a c-preprocessor
is one of degree, but the "originally" seems a bit of a worry.
Does this mean you are not allowed to use macros?  The generated C++ is
theoretically indistinguishable from hand-written code, but is that enough?
Are you allowed to use UML to produce code stubs?

I will hold off buying an iPad until it is clear where this is going.
Is it just an "anti-Adobe" rule, or is it a "F*ck You" to everyone
who dares dispute @[Objective-C's : superiority].

I hope the big boys sort this out.

Hugh


> "must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
> [...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
> directly link against the Documented APIs"
>
> Taken from here:
>
> http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler
>
> Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.
>
> J

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Yanis Benson
BTW, autocompletion is kind of macros(since the source code is only
partially written) and it's not a part of C, Objective-C,... , so it
should be illegal to.

And even if they will apply it to Adobe only at the first time, it's
still a potential danger for anyone. Anyhow, any application is approved
by Apple and they can do what they want, so this rule changes nothing in
the end.

On 04/09/2010 05:56 AM, Hugh Sanderson wrote:

> "Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"
>
> Library? You are not allowed to use a library?  But what is an
> "Application" if not a series of translation layers?
>
> It is interesting to see where this goes.  The difference between
> hxcpp and a c-preprocessor
> is one of degree, but the "originally" seems a bit of a worry.
> Does this mean you are not allowed to use macros?  The generated C++ is
> theoretically indistinguishable from hand-written code, but is that
> enough?
> Are you allowed to use UML to produce code stubs?
>
> I will hold off buying an iPad until it is clear where this is going.
> Is it just an "anti-Adobe" rule, or is it a "F*ck You" to everyone
> who dares dispute @[Objective-C's : superiority].
>
> I hope the big boys sort this out.
>
> Hugh
>
>
>> "must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
>> [...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
>> directly link against the Documented APIs"
>>
>> Taken from here:
>>
>> http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler
>>
>> Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.
>>
>> J
>


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Cauê W.
Apple turns out to be much worst than good ol' monopolistic Microsoft!

2010/4/8 Yanis Benson <[hidden email]>
BTW, autocompletion is kind of macros(since the source code is only partially written) and it's not a part of C, Objective-C,... , so it should be illegal to.

And even if they will apply it to Adobe only at the first time, it's still a potential danger for anyone. Anyhow, any application is approved by Apple and they can do what they want, so this rule changes nothing in the end.


On 04/09/2010 05:56 AM, Hugh Sanderson wrote:
"Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"

Library? You are not allowed to use a library?  But what is an "Application" if not a series of translation layers?

It is interesting to see where this goes.  The difference between hxcpp and a c-preprocessor
is one of degree, but the "originally" seems a bit of a worry.
Does this mean you are not allowed to use macros?  The generated C++ is
theoretically indistinguishable from hand-written code, but is that enough?
Are you allowed to use UML to produce code stubs?

I will hold off buying an iPad until it is clear where this is going.
Is it just an "anti-Adobe" rule, or is it a "F*ck You" to everyone
who dares dispute @[Objective-C's : superiority].

I hope the big boys sort this out.

Hugh


"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J



--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

David Bergman
Yes, this is crazy. So, one cannot even use Objective-C++ which is the language I use for most my iPhone/iPad apps.

These terms clearly exclude haxecpp, since such apps are both (i) written in a non-permissible language AND (ii) the whole haXe standard library is definitely a "compatibility layer".

/David

On Apr 8, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Cauê Waneck wrote:

Apple turns out to be much worst than good ol' monopolistic Microsoft!

2010/4/8 Yanis Benson <[hidden email]>
BTW, autocompletion is kind of macros(since the source code is only partially written) and it's not a part of C, Objective-C,... , so it should be illegal to.

And even if they will apply it to Adobe only at the first time, it's still a potential danger for anyone. Anyhow, any application is approved by Apple and they can do what they want, so this rule changes nothing in the end.


On 04/09/2010 05:56 AM, Hugh Sanderson wrote:
"Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited"

Library? You are not allowed to use a library?  But what is an "Application" if not a series of translation layers?

It is interesting to see where this goes.  The difference between hxcpp and a c-preprocessor
is one of degree, but the "originally" seems a bit of a worry.
Does this mean you are not allowed to use macros?  The generated C++ is
theoretically indistinguishable from hand-written code, but is that enough?
Are you allowed to use UML to produce code stubs?

I will hold off buying an iPad until it is clear where this is going.
Is it just an "anti-Adobe" rule, or is it a "F*ck You" to everyone
who dares dispute @[Objective-C's : superiority].

I hope the big boys sort this out.

Hugh


"must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript
[...] only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and
directly link against the Documented APIs"

Taken from here:

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler

Can't wait to see Adobe's reaction so close to CS5 launch.

J



--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Stefan Scholl
In reply to this post by Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
Tarwin Stroh-Spijer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> My understanding is that they'll be using automatic checkers that look for
> telltale signs of things like LLVM which supposedly have certain
> fingerfrints. I know that to the letter of the law you probably can't go
> HaXe->CPP->iPhone, but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.

There will be a rise of pseudonyms in any iPhone related
discussion. And no company will officially admit that they use
haXe.


Going underground. :-/


--
Web (en): http://www.no-spoon.de/ -*- Web (de): http://www.frell.de/
<!--[if IE 6]><script>for(x in document.open);</script><![endif]-->


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Juan Delgado
The thing is that Apple doesn't have to *prove* anything, they only
have to ban from the App Store what they don't like.  And if something
is suspicious, they'll ban it. If anything, I would say there will be
quite a few false positives ("good" apps refused).

Personally, I think developers should vote with their wallet. I just
don't want to put up with such restrictions and that's why I have an
Android device and why most likely I won't develop iPhone apps.

J

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Stefan Scholl <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Tarwin Stroh-Spijer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> My understanding is that they'll be using automatic checkers that look for
>> telltale signs of things like LLVM which supposedly have certain
>> fingerfrints. I know that to the letter of the law you probably can't go
>> HaXe->CPP->iPhone, but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.
>
> There will be a rise of pseudonyms in any iPhone related
> discussion. And no company will officially admit that they use
> haXe.
>
>
> Going underground. :-/
>
>
> --
> Web (en): http://www.no-spoon.de/ -*- Web (de): http://www.frell.de/
> <!--[if IE 6]><script>for(x in document.open);</script><![endif]-->
>
>
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>



--
Juan Delgado - Zárate
http://zarate.tv
http://blog.zarate.tv

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Lee Sylvester
I agree. I'll not be buying an iPhone again!

Lee



Juan Delgado wrote:

> The thing is that Apple doesn't have to *prove* anything, they only
> have to ban from the App Store what they don't like.  And if something
> is suspicious, they'll ban it. If anything, I would say there will be
> quite a few false positives ("good" apps refused).
>
> Personally, I think developers should vote with their wallet. I just
> don't want to put up with such restrictions and that's why I have an
> Android device and why most likely I won't develop iPhone apps.
>
> J
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Stefan Scholl <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Tarwin Stroh-Spijer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>    
>>> My understanding is that they'll be using automatic checkers that look for
>>> telltale signs of things like LLVM which supposedly have certain
>>> fingerfrints. I know that to the letter of the law you probably can't go
>>> HaXe->CPP->iPhone, but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.
>>>      
>> There will be a rise of pseudonyms in any iPhone related
>> discussion. And no company will officially admit that they use
>> haXe.
>>
>>
>> Going underground. :-/
>>
>>
>> --
>> Web (en): http://www.no-spoon.de/ -*- Web (de): http://www.frell.de/
>> <!--[if IE 6]><script>for(x in document.open);</script><![endif]-->
>>
>>
>> --
>> haXe - an open source web programming language
>> http://haxe.org
>>
>>    
>
>
>
>  


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Stefan Scholl
In reply to this post by Juan Delgado
Juan Delgado <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Personally, I think developers should vote with their wallet. I just
> don't want to put up with such restrictions and that's why I have an
> Android device and why most likely I won't develop iPhone apps.

Yesterday I asked on the net if there's a new iPhone expected
this summer and if I should wait to buy my first iPhone.

Today I searched the net for the release date of Google's Nexus
One in Germany.


And as vor haXe: The Java project is still alive:
http://www.benjamindasnois.com/post/481801311/haxe-java-is-still-there-and-its-closer-than-ever



--
Web (en): http://www.no-spoon.de/ -*- Web (de): http://www.frell.de/
<!--[if IE 6]><script>for(x in document.open);</script><![endif]-->


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

tong-2
In reply to this post by Lee Sylvester
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 09:36 +0100, Lee McColl Sylvester wrote:
> I agree. I'll not be buying an iPhone again!
>
> Lee
>

it's a pity that real community driven platforms like openmoko are
completely off the radar these days.
http://wiki.openmoko.org/

especially when company politics go mad like this.

>
>



--
[)   |   5   |<   †   |2   3   3


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

makc
In reply to this post by Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.

since when Apple needs to prove you anything? they can always just
reject your app for no reason.

--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

jlm@justinfront.net
With a standard Nexus I can bluetooth any android application on to my  
phone from my computer, I don't need to use the Market, obviously you  
need to have trusted sources... such as opensource projects you can  
compile yourself, but I am not sure anyone can do that with a standard  
iPhone?


On 9 Apr 2010, at 10:10, Makc wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.
>
> since when Apple needs to prove you anything? they can always just
> reject your app for no reason.
>
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org


--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: hxcpp and the iphone

Stefan Scholl
In reply to this post by makc
Makc <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Tarwin Stroh-Spijer
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> but there won't be any way to tell, or at least prove.
>
> since when Apple needs to prove you anything? they can always just
> reject your app for no reason.


BTW: Nearly 17 days since Opera submitted their browser app.
http://my.opera.com/community/countup/




--
haXe - an open source web programming language
http://haxe.org