• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion


  • Subject: Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
  • From: Kirk Kerekes <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:26:34 -0500

Just a thought --

Perhaps both the "handle all the possibilities, no matter how arcane" and "keep it simple" camps have a point.

In the software development cycle there are really two entirely different audiences: the developer/tester, and the customer.

The developer/tester needs the software to "break" where it is breakable, quickly, definitively and in a manner that lends itself to being easily figured out.

The customer doesn't want the software to break at all.

So it seems to me that there would be a point in accessors that were sensitive to the build style -- a development build should use the most delicate (and probably simplest) accessor pattern -- possibly even a somewhat wrong-headed one, just to reveal issues of thread safety, etc. The goal of testing is, after all, to break the software before the customer ever sees it, in the hopes of making it more break-resistant.

The release build should, on the other hand, probably use a more robust accessor pattern that may forestall crashes caused by unanticipated user action ("... because fools are so ingenious").

So I would suggest that perhaps accessors with a built-in conditional-compile-switch might be a useful pattern.
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
      • From: Georg Tuparev <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: Distributed Objects over a Network
  • Next by Date: Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
  • Previous by thread: Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
  • Next by thread: Re: Accessor methods and (auto)release: conclusion
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread