InfoWorld is currently publishing a series of programming language assessments:
- 9 Things We Hate About Objective-C, 4 June.
- 15 Things We Hate About Java, 6 March.
- 10 Features Apple Stole for the Swift Programming Language, 9 June.
Notable in these articles is what they do not mention: Eiffel has most of what the author misses in Objective-C and Java; and most of what Swift “stole” it stole from Eiffel.
In this article let us concentrate on the nine Objective-C complaints, by Peter Wayner [1]; subsequent articles will examine the Java “hates” and the Swift “steals”.
Criticism 1: “It is a little too different“
“Objective-C lovers tout that Objective-C is a strict superset of C: If you can do it in C, you should be able to do it in Objective-C. But it doesn’t go the other way, so you’re stuck wondering, “Should I use an Objective-C method description or a C one?” Achieving portability to C programs requires constant vigilance and forethought.”
This is what happens when you mix language paradigms. Eiffel has a close relationship with C, but the two sides are clearly separated. You can call C from Eiffel, and the other way around. You can declare an Eiffel routine as “external C” and even include the C code inline: in other words an Eiffel “method description” can have a C implementation. The structure is always object-oriented (no need to fear that a novice programmer will revert to a C style for the design) but for access to low-level system mechanisms and small functions that should be optimized to the byte and microsecond you use C directly, in its ideal role.
Criticism 2: “It’s still mostly just plain old C“
“For all its object-oriented coolness, you don’t get much else from Objective-C. It’s more of a way to organize your code for large systems than a way to write better code. You’re still responsible for pointers. You’re still responsible for keeping track of memory. “
Eiffel is object-oriented all the way. You are not “responsible for pointers“. References are tame: no pointer arithmetic. You are not “responsible for keeping track of memory“: objects are garbage-collected
“The C programmers loved to call their software a ‘portable assembly code’, and the same is true for Objective-C … except it’s only portable from the Mac to the iPad.”
“Portable assembly code” is exactly what C provides, and hence an excellent target for an Eiffel compiler. As to Eiffel, it runs on all platforms, from Windows to Linux to Solaris to VMS to the Mac.
Criticism 3: Stuck in the 80’s
Criticism 3: “Stuck in the ’80s“
“Parachute pants, big hair, ‘The Breakfast Club’ — and the NeXT machine: Objective-C is like a time machine in programming-language land.”
Eiffel has undergone constant evolution, innovating on all fronts of programming constructs and integrating the best of known techniques.
“The primitives aren’t first-class citizens. Garbage collection, that wonderful idea that sustained Lisp, was adopted by Java ages ago. Objective-C got it in 2006. The same goes for properties and closures.”
All this has been in Eiffel forever. Agents (closures) were introduced in 1999, long before Java, C# and other OO languages had anything of the sort. Eiffel’s assigner commands are vastly superior to properties (no need to write all these boring getter functions).
Criticism 4: “Punctuation“
“The cool modern kids writing Python, Ruby, and CoffeeScript can craft billion-dollar companies without using brackets, braces, and parentheses. You’ll be wearing out your punctuation keys writing Objective-C. Colons, at-signs, asterisks? Is there any character that the language doesn’t use?”
Come on. How can one be so misinformed? The semicolon has been optional in Eiffel for fifteen years. The high-priest style of C, Objective-C, Java, C# and so many others, with its piling up of strange symbols, is something that Eiffel users never had to suffer.
Criticism 5: “Modern syntax“
Not modern syntax, that is:
“Objective-C”s syntax is like Coke: They tried to modernize it in the ’90s, but it never stuck.”
Eiffel’s syntax is clear and simple. Total beginners, including high-school students, pick it up just as easily and naturally as advanced programmers, and as application experts who want to concentrate on their problem, not on learning strange language conventions going back to the nineteen-sixties.
Criticism 6: “No namespaces“
Here Eiffel does not provide what the journalist wants: it is “post-namespaces” (as in “postmodern”). The Eiffel community has decided that the complexity of namespaces was not worth the trouble (what happens when you move packages around?) and prefers simple mechanisms for resolving class name clashes.
Criticism 7: “It only runs in Apple’s corner of the universe“
” Variety is the spice of life. It’s even more important in a world where not everything is an iPhone. If a Windows or Linux shop recruits you, you can forget all of those extra Objective-C extensions you learned because they’ll be of no use.”
Eiffel is not tied to any manufacturer, computer architecture or operating system. If a new processor comes out, or a user needs an exotic platform, a port can usually be produced in a matter of hours. The compiler and the entire environment to which it belongs, EiffelStudio, are written in Eiffel; the supporting runtime is in a highly portable form of C, which requires very little customization, if any, for a new platform. (Here “the compiler” means the Eiffel Software implementation, but other implementations also put a strong emphasis on portability.)
Criticism 8: “XCode is your only choice“
“In the Objective-C world, you get really only one choice. Why do you need to be different, comrade?”
Besides EiffelStudio other compilers and tools are available for Eiffel.
Criticism 9: “Apple’s benevolent dictatorship“
“Do you want to give out more than 100 copies of your iPhone app? Forget it. Do you want to “think different” with your UI? Please go back and read the user interface guidelines. You can’t do anything without Apple’s permission because Apple uses strong crypto to lock down everything — and fanatically tyrannical policies to lock down the rest.”
The Eiffel language definition is steered by a standards committee under Ecma (the organization behind many of the major standards in IT), which anyone can join. EiffelStudio itself is available in open source. The Eiffel world knows nothing like the close control Apple exerts over its product; it welcomes all contributors.
Maybe someone should talk to Mr. Wayner and help him broaden his scope of programming language knowledge.
References
[1] Peter Wayner, 9 Things We Hate About Objective-C, InfoWorld, 4 June 2014, available here.