Re: GC pros and cons
Re: GC pros and cons
- Subject: Re: GC pros and cons
- From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:11:20 -0500
On Jun 30, 2009, at 4:03 AM, Philip Aker wrote:
On 2009-06-25, at 11:11:56, Andy Lee wrote:
Just to be clear, Hamish wrote:
> Compilers conforming to C99 I would trust.
> gcc -fobjc-gc... not so much.
Meaning to me that C99 is a direct descendent of C89 and K&R before
that. So that means roughly 30 years of evolvement and nit-picking
high and low by a lot of people on nearly all platforms extant.
Objective-C 2.0 doesn't seem to have a published standard (like with
a language syntax summary as in Appendix A of C99). Apple has a
track record of introducing stuff that is subsequently dumped. And
gosh, I might not like to be the one who trusted in GC to be around
forever and then found out I had to account for all those [[NSThing
alloc] initWithImpunity:…] calls in Mac OS X 10.7.
Language features can't be removed, nor can languages be changed
rapidly.
The features added to Objective-C have been considered extremely
carefully and added with great care. In the past, changes to the
compiler have been integrated back into GCC in a relatively timely
fashion. Things have changed; now most of the feature work in
Objective-C, including Blocks, is actually developed in the open LLVM
repository.
Furthermore, Apple is participating actively in the ANSI C standards
committee. Both Garbage Collection and Blocks have been presented to
the committee and there is traction for both.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/PostMarkham.htm
And, more specifically:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1370.pdf
GC is pervasive and it is here to stay. A growing pool of Apple's own
code is written GC only.
b.bum _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden