• The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    From Lawrence D?Oliveiro@3:633/10 to All on Tue Aug 18 23:41:28 2026
    The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    Been re-reading this article
    <https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3386332> about the early days of Objective-C -- the ?other? major object-oriented enhancement of C,
    that was a rival to C++ (somewhat) for a while.

    Back then, developing a new compiler from scratch was hard. The
    original Stepstone Objective-C processor was, like CFront for C++, a preprocessor that output C code.

    Then, Stallman?s GNU Project released GCC. Initially that stood for
    ?GNU C Compiler?, but that soon turned into ?GNU Compiler Collection?,
    as the code was consciously structured to allow alternative language
    front-ends to share a common code-generation back-end.

    This adaptability was quite evident to the bright folks at the one
    significant company to adopt Objective-C as a crucial
    productivity-enhancing tool, namely NeXT:

    GCC was first released in 1987. Although it was far from complete,
    GCC appeared well crafted. Nevertheless, the idea of free software
    collaboration seemed radical and unsettling at the time. The
    decision to use GCC was risky. [NeXT?s] Naroff immediately
    established a working relationship with Richard Stallman. Stallman
    turned out to be one of the most prolific programmers Naroff had
    ever worked with, often turning around bug fixes within an hour or
    so, much more agile than the average commercial company. Within a
    few months, Naroff was convinced that GCC and the free software
    development model was a huge competitive advantage for NeXT.

    Now, Stallman has told the story elsewhere of a company he did not
    name, that tried to use GCC as the foundation for its Objective-C
    compiler. They initially refused to open-source it, until he made it
    clear that the General Public License (or ?GPL?) under which the code
    they used was released, required that they make available the source
    code to anything they redistributed that was built on it.

    I thought that company was Stepstone, but it seems they stuck with
    their preprocessor:

    To avoid fragmenting the language, Naroff asked Stepstone to
    collaborate with NeXT on GCC. The free software ?pitch? didn?t
    resonate with Stepstone?they stuck with the separate translator
    and eventually decided to track NeXT?s feature additions.
    Nevertheless, this would lead to a fork between NeXT and
    Stepstone?s versions of the language.

    while it was NeXT that created the native compiler. Therefore it must
    have been the NeXT compiler Stallman was talking about. All the
    article says on this point is:

    NeXT contributed the Objective-C front-end back to Stallman?s Free
    Software Foundation. According to Naroff, NeXTSTEP was the first
    commercial operating system to embrace GCC, helping validate what
    would in later years come to be known as ?open source? development
    for commercial use.

    Makes it sound like it was all amicably done and part of the plan to
    begin with, etc.

    But realistically, in those days, a commercial company voluntarily
    giving away its source code -- especially to something it saw as a
    crucial competitive edge -- would have been unheard of. So to me, this
    makes Stallman?s version somewhat more plausible.

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson@3:633/10 to All on Wed Aug 19 19:51:47 2026
    Subject: Re: The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    On 19/08/2026 7:41 AM, Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
    The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    Been re-reading this article
    <https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3386332> about the early days of Objective-C -- the ?other? major object-oriented enhancement of C,
    that was a rival to C++ (somewhat) for a while.

    Back then, developing a new compiler from scratch was hard. The
    original Stepstone Objective-C processor was, like CFront for C++, a preprocessor that output C code.

    Then, Stallman?s GNU Project released GCC. Initially that stood for
    ?GNU C Compiler?, but that soon turned into ?GNU Compiler Collection?,
    as the code was consciously structured to allow alternative language front-ends to share a common code-generation back-end.

    This adaptability was quite evident to the bright folks at the one significant company to adopt Objective-C as a crucial
    productivity-enhancing tool, namely NeXT:

    GCC was first released in 1987. Although it was far from complete,
    GCC appeared well crafted. Nevertheless, the idea of free software
    collaboration seemed radical and unsettling at the time. The
    decision to use GCC was risky. [NeXT?s] Naroff immediately
    established a working relationship with Richard Stallman. Stallman
    turned out to be one of the most prolific programmers Naroff had
    ever worked with, often turning around bug fixes within an hour or
    so, much more agile than the average commercial company. Within a
    few months, Naroff was convinced that GCC and the free software
    development model was a huge competitive advantage for NeXT.

    Now, Stallman has told the story elsewhere of a company he did not
    name, that tried to use GCC as the foundation for its Objective-C
    compiler. They initially refused to open-source it, until he made it
    clear that the General Public License (or ?GPL?) under which the code
    they used was released, required that they make available the source
    code to anything they redistributed that was built on it.

    I thought that company was Stepstone, but it seems they stuck with
    their preprocessor:

    To avoid fragmenting the language, Naroff asked Stepstone to
    collaborate with NeXT on GCC. The free software ?pitch? didn?t
    resonate with Stepstone?they stuck with the separate translator
    and eventually decided to track NeXT?s feature additions.
    Nevertheless, this would lead to a fork between NeXT and
    Stepstone?s versions of the language.

    while it was NeXT that created the native compiler. Therefore it must
    have been the NeXT compiler Stallman was talking about. All the
    article says on this point is:

    NeXT contributed the Objective-C front-end back to Stallman?s Free
    Software Foundation. According to Naroff, NeXTSTEP was the first
    commercial operating system to embrace GCC, helping validate what
    would in later years come to be known as ?open source? development
    for commercial use.

    Makes it sound like it was all amicably done and part of the plan to
    begin with, etc.

    But realistically, in those days, a commercial company voluntarily
    giving away its source code -- especially to something it saw as a
    crucial competitive edge -- would have been unheard of. So to me, this
    makes Stallman?s version somewhat more plausible.

    Interestingly, Stephen G. Kochan's /Programming in Objective-C/, sixth
    edition has a relevant paragraph. I quote.

    NeXT Software licensed the Objective-C language in 1988 and developed
    its libraries and a development environment called NEXTSTEP in 1992,
    Objective-C support was added to the Free Software Foundation's GNU
    development environment. The copyrights for all Free Software Foun-
    dation (FSF) products are owned by the FSF. It is released under the
    GNU General Public License.

    So, it looks like they had to pay -- Stepstone? -- for the language, and
    then release the source code. The above paragraph doesn't make it sound
    like the source distribution was non-consensual, but doesn't rule it
    out.

    For those looking through their libraries, the book /Object-Oriented Programming and the Objective C Language/ from NEXTSTEP doesn't have
    any historical tidbit that I could find; better just leave it on the
    shelf.


    Happy coding in Objective-C!
    --
    Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
    I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Waldek Hebisch@3:633/10 to All on Fri Aug 21 12:16:52 2026
    Subject: Re: The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
    The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    Been re-reading this article
    <https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3386332> about the early days of Objective-C -- the ?other? major object-oriented enhancement of C,
    that was a rival to C++ (somewhat) for a while.

    Back then, developing a new compiler from scratch was hard. The
    original Stepstone Objective-C processor was, like CFront for C++, a preprocessor that output C code.

    Then, Stallman?s GNU Project released GCC. Initially that stood for
    ?GNU C Compiler?, but that soon turned into ?GNU Compiler Collection?,
    as the code was consciously structured to allow alternative language front-ends to share a common code-generation back-end.

    This adaptability was quite evident to the bright folks at the one significant company to adopt Objective-C as a crucial
    productivity-enhancing tool, namely NeXT:

    GCC was first released in 1987. Although it was far from complete,
    GCC appeared well crafted. Nevertheless, the idea of free software
    collaboration seemed radical and unsettling at the time. The
    decision to use GCC was risky. [NeXT?s] Naroff immediately
    established a working relationship with Richard Stallman. Stallman
    turned out to be one of the most prolific programmers Naroff had
    ever worked with, often turning around bug fixes within an hour or
    so, much more agile than the average commercial company. Within a
    few months, Naroff was convinced that GCC and the free software
    development model was a huge competitive advantage for NeXT.

    Now, Stallman has told the story elsewhere of a company he did not
    name, that tried to use GCC as the foundation for its Objective-C
    compiler. They initially refused to open-source it, until he made it
    clear that the General Public License (or ?GPL?) under which the code
    they used was released, required that they make available the source
    code to anything they redistributed that was built on it.

    I thought that company was Stepstone, but it seems they stuck with
    their preprocessor:

    To avoid fragmenting the language, Naroff asked Stepstone to
    collaborate with NeXT on GCC. The free software ?pitch? didn?t
    resonate with Stepstone?they stuck with the separate translator
    and eventually decided to track NeXT?s feature additions.
    Nevertheless, this would lead to a fork between NeXT and
    Stepstone?s versions of the language.

    while it was NeXT that created the native compiler. Therefore it must
    have been the NeXT compiler Stallman was talking about. All the
    article says on this point is:

    NeXT contributed the Objective-C front-end back to Stallman?s Free
    Software Foundation. According to Naroff, NeXTSTEP was the first
    commercial operating system to embrace GCC, helping validate what
    would in later years come to be known as ?open source? development
    for commercial use.

    Makes it sound like it was all amicably done and part of the plan to
    begin with, etc.

    Original Stallman story was like the following: Jobs asked if
    distributing set of object files allowing re-linking modified
    GNU backened to the Next front end was OK. That is front end
    would be distributed only as a set of object files. The end
    user actually would not receive the compiler, only set of object
    files, so linking would be done by the user. Stallman thougt
    that GPL allowed this, but was worried by the idea, so answered
    "I must ask my lawyer". The lawyer said that this is not
    allowed, that the trick with object files would be treated as
    an attempt to sidestep GPL. Jobs and Next was not happy, but
    decided to distribute the compiler under GPL.

    And yes, Jobs and Next was mentioned explicitely.

    --
    Waldek Hebisch

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Peter Flass@3:633/10 to All on Fri Aug 21 08:53:57 2026
    Subject: Re: The Origins of Objective-C at PPI/Stepstone and Its Evolution at NeXT

    I thought I read in "Sunburst" that Objective C was a Sun product. Unfortunately it has a lousy index, so I can't look it up to check.

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)