Re: Nulling for fun and profit
Posted: Sep 6, 2005 2:10 PM
> > Snotty, ad hominem attacks are a pretty weak way to have a
> > useful conversation. Geez.
> In an ad hominem attack one criticizes an idea by
> attacking the person: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AdHominem .
> If you read my comment carefully, you will see that I
> didn't criticize your idea on the basis of your person.
> IOW, not all personal comments are ad hominem. I can call
> you an idiot, but it doesn't make it an ad hominem, unless
> I'm using it as an argument to criticize your idea.
So it's okay to be snotty and make personally disparaging remarks? Bah.
> To me, your question seemed totally pointless (an
> intentional red-herring). It seemed absurd to me that you
> wouldn't genuinely understand that nulling is required to
> implement imperative containers in a space safe manner.
Thanks for proving my point.
> > You might want to look up "resources". Unless you never
> > put anything into your e.g., stack except atomic types
> > then you are clearly using it for resource management.
> So, when I'm putting, say, integers into a stack, then I'm
> not using a stack for resource management.
No, I said that that's arguable because they are values. Depending on your language, world-view, etc. that fact blurs the line as to what resources need to be managed. Atomic values in e.g., Java don't need any management and so it's easy to argue that they aren't resources. Of course, with facilities like auto-boxing in Java v5, that becomes yet another slippery slope.