sorry. I don't do strawman arguments. a strawman agument would be comparing garbage collectors to MMUs and task schedulers. You guys are getting downright silly trying to be clever with the sarcasm. I don't feel like playing that game. I'll leave that to you twenty-somethings who have the patience to sit around arguing over the obvious.
I know exactly what I want and why I want it. you do whatever floats your boat. I'll do what floats mine. On Friday, June 26, 2009, at 05:26PM, "Andy Lee" <ag...@mac.com> wrote: >On Friday, June 26, 2009, at 07:27PM, "James Gregurich" ><bayoubenga...@mac.com> wrote: >>I've never seen an objc class that mysteriously hangs around beyond the >>destruction of its dependencies (including any autorelease pools that contain >>it). I wouldn't be shocked if there were some....maybe some system singletons? > >System singletons are not an example of something mysteriously hanging around. > If you think they are, you have a very basic misunderstanding. By design, >they do not have all their dependencies destroyed. No mystery. > >>GC isn't nirvana. it does have its perils and issues, and you have to be >>aware of them and code around them. You can't just turn it on and some how >>everything magically works. There is no perfect solution to memory management. > >True, but also a complete straw man. > >>additionally, I find the notion of adding an extra subsystem that >>periodically scans memory looking for pointers to be foolhardy. my code >>already knows what needs to be cleaned up and when. > >Actually, it very often doesn't. That's why you never call dealloc, only >retain and release. That's the whole *point* of retain and release. > >> I don't need a system sitting in the background scanning memory trying to >> clean up behind me. All I need is a mechanism to do the cleanup in a >> maintainable and extensible manner. > >You could make very similar arguments about threading or about object >orientation -- especially Objective-C's flavor of object orientation. Why >should I let some mysterious scheduler decide on a random order for my code to >execute? Why should I let some mysterious method dispatcher decide which >function to call when I know perfectly well what I meant? > >>I'm just expressing my personal opinion. I realize GC has its fans who will >>disagree. > >It's perfectly valid to have a personal level of comfort or discomfort with a >given technology (depending not only on conceptual merits but maturity of >implementation), but I have no idea where you get the idea this is about >fandom. What, is there a GC team with cheerleaders? Is there a clique of >cool kids who only do retain-release? > >--Andy > > > > _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
