Re: @property problem
Re: @property problem
- Subject: Re: @property problem
- From: glenn andreas <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:11:34 -0600
On Feb 17, 2008, at 10:59 AM, William Squires wrote:
But it doesn't answer the question. Why even make the change in the
64-bit runtime? This would seem to hide a source of bugs, by taking
the responsibility for providing storage away from the programmer.
Some storage is still necessary. And besides, in order to take
advantage of Leopard features like this one (whether on PPC or
Intel), you should still have to link against the 10.5 SDK, so it
would seem more reasonable to make the update to both the 32 and 64-
bit runtimes, but only in the 10.5 SDK. Then you could update the
10.5 SDK (to 10.5.1) to allow for this "syntactic sugar" under both
32- and 64-bit.
I mean, after all, all it means is that you're changing the default
size of an (Integer) register in the CPU chip, and updating the OS
to take advantage. How would this make implementing (or not
implementing) this change any harder or easier?
One thing to remember is that if you were to do this, you would need
another entire copy of all the system frameworks - one for the 32 bit
"compatibility" version (for apps linked with 10.4) and another for
the new features that you'd get with linked-with-10.5 apps.
This may not seem like much (since disks are cheap, though we are
talking a lot of space - and going from 1 to 2 DVDs to install Leopard
would be a non-trivial impact) but all of these frameworks get loaded
into memory as well. For example, turn on activity monitor and look
at memory usage once you launch your first 64 bit app. See the nice
big jump in used memory? That's the 64 bit apps, and for now, there
aren't a lot of 64 bit apps out there to make this a problem (and they
tend to be targeted to markets that have lots of memory installed,
etc..).
If this sort of memory usage were to be hit when using "common level"
apps, the whole user experience of OS X would go down.
Not to mention that having to QA system updates with yet-another-
version of the frameworks makes things uglier as well (right now its 2
CPUs x [32 bit + 64 bit + 64 bit GC] which would become 2 CPUs x [32
bit 10.4 + 32 bit 10.5 + 32 bit 10.5 GC + 64 bit + 64 bit GC] - 6 vs
10 testing configuration). There are more than purely technical
decisions involved in shipping products.
Glenn Andreas email@hidden
<http://www.gandreas.com/> wicked fun!
quadrium | prime : build, mutate, evolve, animate : the next
generation of fractal art
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
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:
This email sent to email@hidden