🚀 go-pugleaf

Scott Hess writes
  I don't believe that even the so-called "Common" classes that NeXT
  distributes are StepStone.
  ...  
  Then again, I might be full of it.  But I think that NeXT did
  their own base classes, and probably the runtime stuff, too.

They did - there is no StepStone in the NeXT software, as noted by
the NeXT gent who posted last week. The only Common Class in question
really would have been Object, and it was rewritten.

     I would hazzard that NeXTstep could be built (same functions,
     similar interface, etc.) with C++. Oh, NeXT might have to add and
     play with it some (more than with OC?), but they would get there.
     (This is not hard for me to imagine since we added the stuff to
     C to make ClassIC - create the dynamic glue and map appropriate
     procedure calls and variables into the message/name table within
     the glue parts, ...).
  
  Somehow, I suspect it would not look as "elegant", which is a big
  thing with NeXT . . . :-).

Yes, elegance would probably suffer, though I would have faith by
now in the NeXT designers in doing a good job. The NeXTstep crew
has earned my faith - their work transcends Objective-C.

Mark R. Thomsen