MonoTouch for iPhone - C# bindings for native APIs

by sandaru1 • 17 years ago

46 22 17 years ago

jasonkester2• 17 years ago

It looks like you have to develop in MonoDevelop to use this, which is a bit of a shame. After all, the reason most teams use C# in the first place is that you get to use the best IDE around. Outside the context of VS.NET, C# doesn't have nearly as much going for it.

Still, if it lets me avoid Objective C, I think I'll give this a shot.

profquail• 17 years ago

You can use C# with XCode: http://code.google.com/p/cocoa-sharp-dev/wiki/CSharpPlugin

MonoTouch's site has a tutorial on how to use XCode + Monotouch: http://monotouch.net/Documentation/XCode

rit• 17 years ago

Additionally, FWIW, the entire GUI is done with Interface builder rather than MonoDevelop.

MonoDevelop fires up interface builder, and then quietly rebuilds the backing code when you're done editing. So they haven't completely reinvented the wheel, it is using standard NIB files.

cschep• 17 years ago

Consider toying around with Objective-C. I was pleasantly surprised. I had never used SmallTalk, and I had a good time with the idea of "message passing". This doesn't take away the requirement of having to own a Mac, so it's free to try it out anyway.

If you have already tried it out and hate it, then I'm glad there is a new option!

antonovka3• 17 years ago

I've been doing Objective-C for a long time, and I can barely stand the language. I use it because it's the most pragmatic choice for Mac (and now iPhone) development, but if I could I'd have dropped it in a heartbeat. It's incredibly verbose and almost the antithesis of "don't repeat yourself" -- as an arbitrary example, declaring an Objective-C 2.0 properties requires three different declarations:

1) Declare the instance variable in your header file: NSString * var;

2) Declare the property that matches the ivar in your header file: @property(nonatomic, retain) NSString * var;

3) Add the synthesize line to your implementation file: @synthesize var;

I mean, seriously Apple? Seriously? You couldn't compress that down to a single @property declaration?

That said, Apple has now added closures, which provides a highly effective tool for cutting through the usually highly repetitive, verbose code of Obj-C (except, perhaps, for property declarations :) and writing something a quite bit more palatable.

My only remaining complaint is the lack of GC. It's not that I mind reference counting (it's not very hard to get it right), but that cyclic references cause leaks, and there's lots of places where it's easy and beneficial to create cyclic references -- especially with closures.

If MonoTouch means I can write well-performing native applications for the iPhone in F#, god damn! I'm there.

solutionyogi• 17 years ago

Jason, I have a lot of respect for you but saying that C# doesn't have anything going other than the IDE is completely wrong. With LINQ, lambda expressions, continuations, reflection, extension methods, automatic properties, I believe that C# is the no.1 strongly typed language.

jasonkester2• 17 years ago

I also believe that C# is the #1 strongly typed language, and it's my language of choice for pretty much all of my own projects. Sorry if I implied otherwise (and therefore tarnished my reputation as a fanatical microsoft supporter).

There is actually a hole in the other half of my earlier statement. Java has essentially the same quality IDE available (since IntelliJ IDEA =~ VS.NET + ReSharper), and yet I don't find myself compelled to use it for anything.

rufugee3• 17 years ago

This gets my vote simply because I won't be forced to use an otherwise unmarketable language like Objective C. Not that I hate the syntax...it's not that bad really...but I hate that I'm forced to learn it just for iPhone or OS X development. I can't really use it elsewhere. With Mono/C# that's not the case, and it's immediately worth it. I hope they'll target other phones and make it at least possible to migrate your app from one to the other, but a quick glance at the tutorials makes me suspect this is very bound to the iPhone.

I'm also more than a little concerned that you have to pay for the dev environment itself (with an evaluation version on the way). I really hate this model. They should've gone the route of giving away to tools themselves for free, but charging upon the need to deploy. This allows developers like me to vet the platform before spending hard-earned dollars.

corey• 17 years ago

> This gets my vote simply because I won't be forced to use an otherwise unmarketable language like Objective C

I don't understand this argument. If you're already familiar with object oriented programming, it should only take you a day or two to learn Objective-C. This won't save you from having to learn Cocoa Touch, which is where the real time investment is.

jorgem• 17 years ago

>> it should only take you a day or two to learn Objective-C

It's the libraries! Takes a long time to learn them all...

mdeicaza2• 17 years ago

We are looking at fixing this.

There will be a free eval that will not require you to buy until you are ready to test/deploy on the device.

rufugee3• 17 years ago

Great news thanks...that is the way to do it!

antonovka3• 17 years ago

Not being able to measure on-device performance and stability during evaluation is a pretty big deal. The simulator is only useful as a smoke test, even when using the native tools.

MonoTouch for iPhone - C# bindings for native APIs

Related Stories