| Dr. Scott Steinman 2005-03-16, 4:04 pm |
| In article <9Oqrd.6826$9F2.370716@phobos.telenet-ops.be>, David Stes
<stes@D5E02B1D.kabel.telenet.be> wrote:
> Dr. Scott Steinman <steinman@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
>
> To be more accurate, it is argued that it is not necessary to develop tools
> to automate the task.
>
> There are certainly different classes of Apple bigots; you argue that it
> is necessary to develop tools to automate the memory management.
>
> Other Apple bigots argued that the memory management is perfect the way it
> is and that no tools should be developed to automate the task.
>
> These are already two different things ...
David,
Trying to argue your case by classifying me as me an "Apple bigot"
diminishes the strength of your claims. It makes you appear to be a
"bigot" yourself. Please give logical, factual explanations and you
will be listened to and perhaps others might agree with you more often.
Furthermore, just because I use Apple's libraries, it does not
automatically make me an "Apple bigot". I use and program both Macs and
PCs every day. I use several programming languages and libraries as
well. In other words, I use whatever tool is correct for the task at
hand, no matter who makes it. I have already stated that I like
automatic garbage collection, and prefer to have it when it is applied
properly and to the correct task. I accept that Apple knew that it
wasn't appropriate for distributed objects -- just as I would hesistate
to use it during real-time data acquisition in the laboratory. For that
task it is wrong. Whether or not they could have provided garbage
collection only for situtations other than DO is something I don't
know.
Dr. Scott Steinman
|