Oh my hell, List Mom, please put a stop to this. The poor horse was
beaten to death long ago.
Thanks
On Jun 26, 2009, at 7:56 PM, Michael Ash <michael....@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 8:40 PM, James
Gregurich<bayoubenga...@mac.com> wrote:
On Friday, June 26, 2009, at 04:41PM, "Kyle Sluder" <kyle.slu...@gmail.com
> wrote:
100% might. Maybe 0% today, and then tomorrow Apple might release
an
update that causes all objects to hang around forever. You don't
know, and you shouldn't care.
I don't. in practice its not particularly relevant as I can't think
of an instance where I made a class' lifecycle dependent on the
lifetime of an NSFont (just to use your example).
I really don't get this whole line of reasoning. I don't get why
the fact that a system keeps an NSFont around justifies me adding a
whole new system to scan memory and look for pointers to determine
which ones need to be released.
I think you've got it backwards. You're the one who said that GC was
bad because it has nondeterministic behavior for object destruction.
The rest of us are merely pointing out that Cocoa has nondeterministic
object destruction in non-GC mode as well.
Mike
_______________________________________________
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/ershler%40cvrti.utah.edu
This email sent to ersh...@cvrti.utah.edu
_______________________________________________
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
