Forgot your password?

Comment: ARC (Score 1) 616

by Kostya (#37132962) Attached to: C++ 2011 and the Return of Native Code

With ARC, there really isn't a need for a garbage collector. I've used both, and the only things that happen in ARC that bite you are things that happen in Java, et al. I.e. you can still use a null pointer and such and get an error.

The only place I have been truly surprised is that some of the Foundation stuff can perform weird or unexpectedly. That's more that ARC is fully Cocoa ready and that you need to tread carefully when using toll-free stuff. But then ARC warns you, and then you need to just follow some simple rules of thumb about giving ARC a hint about how you plan to use the Foundation object. I suspect that might get resolved later.

All in all, I am *very* impressed with ARC. It makes life so much easier, and it gets you almost all the advantages of GC--or at least all the ones that matter or people really use.


Thermal Nanotape Promises Cooler, Healthier Chips 48

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the what's-wrong-with-grease dept.

TSA Pats Down 3-Year-Old 1135

Posted by samzenpus
from the security-theater dept.

Comment: Third Party JVMs (FROM TFA) (Score 1) 451

by Kostya (#33973750) Attached to: Apple Deprecates Their JVM

From the release notes linked to in the article:

Third Party JVM Support and Locations

Java Preferences now shows all discovered JVMs in a single list in the General tab. This list shows the name, vendor, architecture, and full version of each JVM (8146434). It also coalesces multiple versions of the same major platform version from the same vendor and architecture into the same line. Clicking on the version at the end of the line shows a popup menu which chooses between these multiple versions.

People who *actually develop* on Mac have always complained about the JVM being behind, and it sounds like Apple is opening up the JVM hooks so that third parties can write JVMs for the Mac and get the full integration. So Apple is really giving everyone what they wanted: a stock JVM maintained by the Java Source (Oracle/Sun) just like all the other platforms.

Sheesh, paranoid much? Everyone on Slashdot is so convinced that the Mac App Store is the coming of the apocalypse that they are jumping to some insane conclusions.

Comment: Mobile Java, Carriers, Licensing--Oh My! (Score 5, Informative) 342

by Kostya (#33875230) Attached to: Oracle's Newest Move To Undermine Android










Comment: Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch (Score 3, Insightful) 520

by Kostya (#33830630) Attached to: Against Apple, Ballmer Floats Microsoft Merger With Adobe



Comment: Re:Oh teh ironies! (Score 1) 279

by Kostya (#33773824) Attached to: Genetically Altering Trees To Sequester More Carbon

Actually, again, you need to read the links I posted, because he does bring economics to bear on the problem.

No, the mods aren't reading the links either. Oh well--wouldn't be the first time :-)

His supposition is that the primary solutions of the environmental movement are both damaging to the economies of the world while producing little benefit. He doesn't say burn the earth, he champions applying resources to both solve the problem AND not squander the resources we have. His point isn't that we shouldn't do something, but that simple economic analysis shows that some solutions are just going to have more impact--unfortunately he's not too kind to Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth".

He's not arguing profitability, he's arguing "biggest bang for buck". I.e. let's get some results. So he's not the enemy of the environmental movement, he's just slaughtering sacred cows and then asking us to be serious about the problem.

So again, I stand by my comment: you should have read the links (or just googled it) before making statements about how "he couldn't have meant economics". Again, he's an economist--I think he knows what he means :-)

Comment: Re:Trolling for funding (Score 1) 279

by Kostya (#33771602) Attached to: Genetically Altering Trees To Sequester More Carbon


Again, I'm sure there's some loon who thinks we should burn down the rain forest for cattle grazing, burn coal unfiltered, AND use genetic trees to make it all "ok" ... but I think this is more of a solution for the carbon sequestering problem. I believe there may also be some people making some unpopular suggestions (like the economist Lomborg) who might see this as a more efficient solution to carbon with a more orthogonal approach to human behavior (such as raising people out of poverty and stabilizing emerging economies--because that actually lowers pollution while stabilizing/improving the human populace). But again, I'm not sure anyone but the loons are saying "Burn it all down and replace it with super-trees."

Doesn't mean we shouldn't change our behavior AND consider radical carbon sequestering--but I think getting the science/facts/research right might be the best no matter what solution(s) we choose.

Comment: Re:Oh teh ironies! (Score 2, Interesting) 279

by Kostya (#33771564) Attached to: Genetically Altering Trees To Sequester More Carbon





Comment: Oh teh ironies! (Score 2, Insightful) 279

by Kostya (#33771422) Attached to: Genetically Altering Trees To Sequester More Carbon


He was metaphorically burned at the stake for those comments, but honestly, it made sense--*if* the science backed it up. And I mean "made sense" in that it's a huge issue and that would be an elegant hack to solving some of the key problems we are having. It might even open up other possible solutions--better solutions--but those ideas were dismissed out of hand.

The whole affair reminded me of the outrage over Lomborg (http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities.html) who basically pointed out that the economics of the the environmental solutions espoused by the Climate Change community just didn't make sense. Or that you could have larger impacts in terms of changing society and the global community by putting your money into other "apparently orthogonal" solutions.

While it has been debated about whether these guys are "climate change deniers" (I think that's a red herring from fanatics), they are pointing out alternatives or uncomfortable facts. Let's do some science, some research, and some testing to make sure they don't have a point. If it's that important to address Climate Change, why are not ALL solutions on the table (as opposed to ones that fit a particular agenda or world-view)?

Comment: Sure about that? (Score 1) 396

by Kostya (#33271656) Attached to: How Can I Make Testing Software More Stimulating?

"I know I'm not that lazy, as I can spend hours on end writing software, but there's something about testing that makes my mind constantly want to wander off and think about something else."

Well, actually, that is kind of lazy :-)

Seriously: you do the parts you enjoy and you skip the parts you don't. That, my friend, is lazy. Or at least undisciplined. And if you are getting paid to do it ... well, that's just unprofessional.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, it's just that I have been at this for 15 years, and I constantly run into people who don't bother to test. It pays off in the long run, it makes for better software, and it makes you a better developer ... you just have to have some professional pride and buckle down. I mean you know that you need to, you know it would make better software, and yet you can't seem to find the interest/sel-interest/professional pride/whatever to do it? Don't you see a problem there?

Comment: Re:History repeats (Score 2, Insightful) 497

by Kostya (#33234846) Attached to: The Coming Onslaught of iPad Competitors

Are you seriously comparing the OLPC XO Sugar interface to iOS and the iPad?

I own both. While I have always loved the OLPC for what it represents, the total experience is not even in the same league as an iPad. Not even remotely close. I'm not dissing OLPC--I love mine. But it isn't even fair to put the two in the same ring and say they are the same kind of polish or experience.

I agree with your points about Macs vs. PCs--Apple has somehow cast the conversation about the OS and the UI and then magically extended that to the hardware. But your comparison of Sugar and iOS is ... wow.

Comment: Uh, Exclusive Deal (And GSM)? (Score 2, Informative) 251

by Kostya (#32738100) Attached to: Verizon iPhone Rumored For Early Next Year

How can anyone post this when we have the exclusive deal confirmed? http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/10/confirmed-apple-and-atandt-signed-five-year-iphone-exclusivity-de/

And the other is that the last time I checked, Verizon doesn't have GSM. Why would Apple manufacture two different devices, and one that can't be used in all the other world markets? I'm not trying to start a GSM/CDMA holy war, just acknowledging that Apple is doing just fine with AT&T and GSM. Why would they go through all that trouble just to get Verizon customers?

Especially since Verizon seems to insist on branding all phones they offer--I don't see how Steve would accept that either.

Don't hit the keys so hard, it hurts.