Memory Leaks Suck
-
William E. Kempf wrote: You seem to be misguided on several counts, however: 1) It's not that difficult to manage memory correctly in C++ using tools like boost::shared_ptr. 2) There are full GC systems available for C++, if you prefer. I carefully checked all of my posts in this thread and can't find a word that implies the "misguidance" you mentioned here. Some of my comments are just jokes, they may not be funny, but they don't say anything that is not there. William E. Kempf wrote: 3) All of the languages you list are still prone to memory leaks, and the idea that GC makes this impossible has actually lead to there being a LOT of poorly designed and implemented libraries in said languages. By your way of thinking, I might infer that you imply in the above that .NET, VB, and Java are never the right tool for any job. William E. Kempf wrote: You can only "choose them according to the job at hand" if you actually understand the pros and cons of the choices. Sounds like you don't. May be I am more ignorant than I thought. That's ok, I don't have an inflated ego as John does anyway. William E. Kempf wrote: Further, it sounds like instead of promoting the "right tool for the right job" school of thought, you prefer to at least hint that C++ is never the right tool. William E. Kempf Forgive me for asking, how the hell did you get that from my comments? If we could put words into an opponent's mouth or thoughts into an opponent's head, it would be too easy, isn't it?
Black Cat wrote: William E. Kempf wrote: 3) All of the languages you list are still prone to memory leaks, and the idea that GC makes this impossible has actually lead to there being a LOT of poorly designed and implemented libraries in said languages. By your way of thinking, I might infer that you imply in the above that .NET, VB, and Java are never the right tool for any job. Hardly. What I said above in no way can be taken as a criticism of the languages, while your "jokes" suggesting that any of the other languages would be better than C++ is a strong indication that you think C++ is inferior, and by implication, never the right choice. Black Cat wrote: William E. Kempf wrote: Further, it sounds like instead of promoting the "right tool for the right job" school of thought, you prefer to at least hint that C++ is never the right tool. William E. Kempf Forgive me for asking, how the hell did you get that from my comments? If we could put words into an opponent's mouth or thoughts into an opponent's head, it would be too easy, isn't it? If you read what I said, I refer to the underlying implications of your "jokes", and never claim you come straight out and make such claims. Are you now saying that this was not the meaning of your jokes? If it's not, then what was? William E. Kempf
-
Black Cat wrote: William E. Kempf wrote: 3) All of the languages you list are still prone to memory leaks, and the idea that GC makes this impossible has actually lead to there being a LOT of poorly designed and implemented libraries in said languages. By your way of thinking, I might infer that you imply in the above that .NET, VB, and Java are never the right tool for any job. Hardly. What I said above in no way can be taken as a criticism of the languages, while your "jokes" suggesting that any of the other languages would be better than C++ is a strong indication that you think C++ is inferior, and by implication, never the right choice. Black Cat wrote: William E. Kempf wrote: Further, it sounds like instead of promoting the "right tool for the right job" school of thought, you prefer to at least hint that C++ is never the right tool. William E. Kempf Forgive me for asking, how the hell did you get that from my comments? If we could put words into an opponent's mouth or thoughts into an opponent's head, it would be too easy, isn't it? If you read what I said, I refer to the underlying implications of your "jokes", and never claim you come straight out and make such claims. Are you now saying that this was not the meaning of your jokes? If it's not, then what was? William E. Kempf
William E. Kempf wrote: Hardly. What I said above in no way can be taken as a criticism of the languages, while your "jokes" suggesting that any of the other languages would be better than C++ is a strong indication that you think C++ is inferior, and by implication, never the right choice. No, I just want to make fun of the religeous passion some people have with C++. Knowing that there are so many VB jokes on this site, some of them rather senseless and humourless, you would consider my jokes justified, would you? William E. Kempf wrote: If you read what I said, I refer to the underlying implications of your "jokes", and never claim you come straight out and make such claims. Are you now saying that this was not the meaning of your jokes? If it's not, then what was? Again, I categorically deny any of the underlying implications. My jokes are some kind of balance act as explained above. If someone "wants" them to imply other things, then it's not my fault. Have a nice day. :)
-
You might think you're funny, but I, for one, wish you would stop acting like a dick. To the CP old-timers - yeah I know.... "pot = kettle = black;" ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: To the CP old-timers - yeah I know.... "pot = kettle = black;" Wouldn't that be "pot == kettle == black;"? Michael Martin Australia mjm68@tpg.com.au "I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end." - Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
