Re: Xcode 3.2.3: cannot pair a synthesized setter/getter with a user defined setter/getter
Re: Xcode 3.2.3: cannot pair a synthesized setter/getter with a user defined setter/getter
- Subject: Re: Xcode 3.2.3: cannot pair a synthesized setter/getter with a user defined setter/getter
- From: Christiaan Hofman <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:26:24 +0200
On Jun 18, 2010, at 22:01, Bill Bumgarner wrote:
>
> On Jun 18, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Christiaan Hofman wrote:
>
>> BTW, does anyone know why atomic is the default? IME almost all properties I have don't need to be atomic, and the few that need to be actually require a custom implementation anyway. So in fact making them atomic is a huge performance hit for no reason whatsoever, i.e. very bad.
>
> The decision was made that random crashers were worse than the relatively minor performance overhead incurred (and, really, it is relatively minor in most cases -- pathological cases & microbenchmarks aside).
>
> b.bum
>
>
IMHO, that's a bad comparison and therefore a bad decision. It does not take into account the crucial statistics about how often you actually need it, which is really very rarely for most situations, and you should know when you do anyway. So you have two rare situations, namely when performance becomes a big issue and when you actually access properties from multiple threads. These two cancel each other out, which leaves you with the general argument that atomic is generally unnecessary therefore bad. Moreover, it gives you the non-intuitive warnings like what's discussed in this thread. Just my opinion.
Christiaan
_______________________________________________
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