Re: Thoughts about GNUstep

Hi,

On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 5:20 PM Gregory Casamento <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 10:49 PM Michael Rans <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> At this point, the developer may lose interest and look for something
>> else. So in my view, the clang version of the libraries should be the
>> default on all distros with the gcc version as an option.
>>
> Agreed, and this IS our fault. Some people might argue that this shouldn't
> matter, but I, personally, think that it is very important for us to either
> get ObjC2.0 into GCC *OR* drop support for it entirely.   Dropping support
> is difficult, politically, since we ARE a GNU project.
>

Perhaps it shouldn't be framed as 'dropping support,' but rather as
'prioritizing progress.'
Sometimes, shedding legacy constraints is the only way to move a project
forward. By making Objective-C 2.0 and the Clang/LLVM toolchain the primary
focus, it will signal that GNUstep is a modern, evolving platform. If GCC
support becomes temporarily non-functional as a result, it shifts the
impetus to the GCC community to modernize their Objective-C implementation.
As long as GNUstep continues to bend over backwards to support an outdated
runtime, it remove any incentive for GCC to improve.

just my 2 cents on that topic.

cheers,
Sebastian

-- 
https://buzzdeee.reitenba.ch