Okay...at first I was wondering why i didnt post here already as this seemed pretty familiar, but then it came back to me...

I gotta say - I'm sorry - in advance; i usually don't like people bitching about manuals if they dont understand it, but...
your documentation is total crap.
It has several grammatical mistakes, uses _really_ unusual vocabulary, doesnt seem to have any strcture, jumps from informal crap ("It does exactly what it says;" and afterwards you tell me what it really does?) to complete jibberish ("This is useful to provide one way to achieve a result, without knowing the targets." ????) - its just written awfully.
f.i.

delegate? ownership? What the...!!??

...the doxygen is fine...

Alright...sorry for the little outburst - and to the point:
I think I can finally grasp the concept and I gotta say - I really like the idea. Nevertheless I just dont know why to use it as it is now. I got to work with (visual) c++ anyway...also beacuse theres just no way to do a serious project in SED.
Also i dont get why someone who writes in C and needs classes would use LiteFoundation instead of C++ (or objective-c) as it seems to be pretty invasive not really worth the effort (but maybe thats just me)

Something like a pre-compiler that lets you write C++ syntax (classes, inheritance and stuff...) and translates it into Lite-C would be cool...dunno if someone already did this or if its even possible - just an idea that might get some more feedback

so long

Yup yup and yup. The problem is, it follows an structure. The thing is, the getting started guide is to tell people how things are meant to be. I can't throw a huge bunch of code at people and say "hey, learn it!".
This is why the informal "crap" is there, it is meant to tell you the naming conventions, memory conventions and all this stuff. Plus the global concept of Lite Foundation, how things work in general etc. pp.
This knowledge is supposed to give you an advantage, because it sets a default way for how things work and saves you from trips to the reference just to look what the function does or what kind of object it returns.

Its not really easy to explain all this stuff and looking at the rest of your post it looks like you didn't tried to understand it (or you just failed because of my grammar). I will try to write it better, and this is also why I asked for feedback (without, I can't improve it).


What the "ownership" is, is described in broad detail in the chapter before your quoted line. And I really hope that you don't count "delegate" to the unusual vocabulary, because it isn't unusual. In Deutschland würden wir übrigens "delegieren" dazu sagen.
"Es ist verboten die ownership an den caller zu delegieren weil der Funktionsname signalisiert das genau das nicht passiert."



Yes, but it is possible do a serious project in LED. Beside that, I don't want you to use Lite Foundation just because I think its cool. If you like C++, C#, ObjC or whatever more than C, feel free to use it.
But I have discussed this already two times in this thread and a third time isn't needed. Just read my response to eg. ratchet, I have discussed it there and then letter in response to Uhrwerk again.


Again, this has been already discussed two times here. Its not just the concept of classes that makes Lite Foundation what it is.


Probably, but I hate C++ (yes, its that simple)

Hum? I couldnt find any structure but way too long sentences.
I think it was Goethe who once wrote something like this to a local duke - 'I'm sorry my letter is that long but i couldnt find the time to make it shorter'
My point: The shorter the better.



If I read a 'getting started' I want to get started and not be told why I should use Lite-Foundation in the first place.
("Now you might come up with the question: Why all the hassle?" - No i wont...)



Then maybe call it 'All about Lite-Foundation' not 'Getting started'.



Ye well I tried to _get started_ and got already lost on the first page.



I consider this to be productive feedback.



Whats LED?


So my advice is - write a real 'Getting started'. Theres way too much information thats supposed to be in a Manual or a 'reading further'
You can shorten it by half (well almost^^) only if you cut out all the
"Lite Foundation needs to trick a little bit;"
"surprise"
"Now you might come up with the question: Why all the hassle? Why not just use structs
and ship a few functions with them and everything is just fine?"
"Now thats all fine, but it leads
to a few problems: The main question is: When do I have to free what?"
“Hey, Iʼm interested in this object, please keep it alive”
“Alright, thanks for keeping the object alive, but I donʼt
need it anymore” (informal crap aleart^^)
"You probably have already noticed it"
...and on and on...
These sentences either contain none information at all or could be said in 3 words max.


I hope this might help you interest some more people in Lite Foundation - Im pretty sure this is a main reason why 'nobody gets it'.
I also have some more suggestions for your documentation if youre interested pm me or so.

@FlorianP: i have some first simple conceptional notes here for a PreCompiler.
Thought about it for some time now. Hopefully i have some time todo a simple prototype during the next week(this one is already full>.<).

My goal is to provide a precompiler that can process a class, an reconstructs it as a struct with function bindings, being able to derive from another class.

Precompiler automatically constructs the base constructor of the class(which includes the function binding).

LATER support for This/Self yet. This needs a second step, going through the whole code and adding new parameters to the medthos(an autoadded parameter).

Classes will be plased in .class files(easier for me to just go through the classfile instead of going through the whole project, maybe screwing womething up. LAter maybe in normal cfiles). class files are precomputed to c files, and collected in a file called Classes.c. This should be the only file the user has to include.

Thats my concept, already wrote a simple parsing systems at work for another purpose. Lets see.

Greetings
Rackscha

Wow, the next Lite Foundation release is here. And it is totally awesome, I'm really excited!

Just to get you started right away, here is the download link:
http://cl.ly/7Btf

And now about the new features:
The first new feature is of course multithreading, this gives you three new classes: LFThreadRef, LFLockRef, LFConditionRef. Now the sad part: Lite-C users will certainly have crashes when using the multithreaded Lite Foundation. Why? Because of the tricks I had to use to get Lite Foundation running, it uses a lot of global variables and function pointers. There is no way around this and it makes no sense to introduce a big lock because I can't handle everything on the Lite Foundation level.
I'm sorry and will certainly file a lot of feature requests!

But, there are way more exciting features. Lets start with a really useful one: Zombies.
Zombies is a operating mode of the runtime, in this mode the runtime won't purge objects from memory but let there bodies leak intentionally. Why? For a good reason: It will log EVERY access you make to the death object! So you can be sure that you can track over releasing of objects and using of deallocated objects as fast as possible.
The runtime will log the function that caused the problem, the objects class and the objects pointer, enough to give you an idea where the problem is. This is incredible useful for beginners new to the Lite Foundations memory model.

Here is an actual example and the output in the console:


This piece of code will log:

Pretty cool, hu?


More cool stuff? Oh yea, remember the first Lite Foundation version? It had a LFDateRef class and to be honest it sucked. One couldn't do any math with it and it couldn't represent fractions of seconds.
Now Lite Foundation knows again a LFDateRef object. Together with its buddies LFDateComponentsRef and LFTimeZoneRef, it is crazy powerful. And I mean really crazy powerful!
LFDateRef just wraps the time in seconds and sub-miliseconds since 1st January 2001. LFDateComponentsRef can get the single components (days, hours, etc) from a LFDateRef plus it can calculate with them. The difference between my birth and today in minutes? No problem, just two lines of code!
LFTimeZoneRef is an abstract wrapper for a time zone (currently no daylight saving time support, sorry). It holds an offset to GMT in seconds, thats it.

Here is an actual example:

All time function respect leap years and all the such and are really crazy powerful and useful. The download folder contains an example.

With working dates object, one could also revive the LFTimer class, right? Right! There is a new LFTimer class, it allows firing in the sub-milisecond range, or in an hour. Or at a specific date.

There is a lot of other stuff, but I guess I have already mentioned the most awesome stuff. Like I said, I'm really, really excited about this release and I hope you like it.

@FlorainP: Sorry, there is no new getting started guide in this release. But I'm working on it! If you don't mind, I will send you a draft via PN so you can say something about it?

Edit: Fun fact; The line count of this release is almost twice as large as the one from the previous release. 12333 vs 6402 lines.

I did not really took a deep look in lite foundation yet, but retain count thing alone is a reason for me to use it. (that comes from objective-c if i am not mistaken?)

Next time(not soon) i start something with lite-c i am definitely going to use it.

Yay, awesome


Not really. ObjC by itself isn't an reference counting environment, but Foundation is. This is, everything that inherits from NSObject is automatically part of the reference counting environment and usually if one programs something for OS X or iOS, everything inherits von NSObject.
But its not only ObjC, many other languages also have the concept of an reference counting environment, eg. boost:: shared_ptr (afair its also in the tr1 namespace and C++0x has its in its default library).

Anyway, if you are familiar with Foundation, you will also be familiar with Lite Foundation. I tried to be very near to Foundation because I work with it every day (although the name Lite Foundation doesn't imply that its a Foundation spin off). There are also different concepts that I don't like in Foundation, but you will see what I mean if you are familiar with it.

Yeah, i only used obj-c with foundation so far(enterprise survey app with lots of features for ipad for a company/internal use.), my mistake.

I did not like(did not hate either) obj-c except for some neat features like retain counting etc... Personally liked android approach for screens more.(written same app for android too.)

maybe i just did not fully understand it... maybe.

Mh, you mix up the language and its frameworks a lot here. For example, UIKit (the high level screen rendering stuff framework) is not part of Foundation.
What most people hate about ObjC is the [] stuff, but I personally like it a lot because it makes nested function calls way easier to read.

yeah, by saying obj-c, i generally refer to objc+foundation+uikit(ios development platform as a whole).