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/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
