Re: looking for a memory problem
Re: looking for a memory problem
- Subject: Re: looking for a memory problem
- From: Charles Srstka <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:07:55 -0500
On Jul 17, 2012, at 11:31 AM, Martin Hewitson wrote:
> On 17, Jul, 2012, at 05:42 PM, Sean McBride <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:30:39 +0200, Martin Hewitson said:
>>
>>> This started to appear during the process of going from GC to non-GC.
>>
>> What do you mean "non-GC"? I strongly suggest going from GC to ARC, not from GC back to the stone-age retain-release. Although quite different 'under the hood', writing for GC and ARC is not so different, and you can even switch over slowly.
>
> That was my original plan, but ARC is 64-bit only, right? I'm not sure I'm ready to drop 32-bit support yet, at least not without canvasing opinion from the users.
>
> Martin
I’ve got an app that’s backward-compatible all the way to 10.4/PPC, to which I added Sparkle support about half a year ago. In that half year, according to the Sparkle stats, 93.99% of my users have been on 64-bit Intel CPUs. Of the 6% who are not on 64-bit Intel, only 2.72% are using 32-bit Intel, followed by 1.91% on 32-bit PPC and 1.38% on 64-bit PPC (i.e. the G5).
Needless to say, the next major release of my app will not be backward-compatible all the way to 10.4/PPC. I’d caution against putting too much effort into supporting what may well be a statistically insignificant portion of your user base. If you’re porting from GC, port it to ARC, and you’ll save yourself a great deal of time and headaches.
Charles
_______________________________________________
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