Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> Done before 19 - what - 85, at times when there were few 32 bit processors
> available near and far? I was almost certain you would did out something
> ancient to show "your point".

Yep. As I said.

>>As for a newer reference? Not too many around, as people don't use
>>reference counting seriously
> 
> No, because, frankly, you just neither know what you are talking about, nor
> that it is actually being used frequently. In fact, it is so "flawed" that
> it made it into ISO/IEC PDTR 19768, aka TR1 for C++ standard library
> extensions to be added to ISO C++ 200X. But hey, many string class libraries
> (for various languages) use reference counting internally as well.

And this reference counting system -- does it do reference counting on 
objects that include arbitrary pointers in them? That would be a trick. 
Or is it only a reference-counted pointer to a value that contains no 
pointers?  I'll grant you that the latter is sometimes useful, as you 
can actually collect the garbage when there aren't any circular 
references, as long as you remember to free all the links you're 
pointing to manually.

> So sure, even though in fact the very program you use to write your messages
> posted to this newsgroup uses reference counting, you say it isn't used
> frequently.

Thank you for completely ignoring the second half of the message I posted.

> Because as I take it, as in so many
> programming related discussions/flamewars you started before, you managed to
> dig a nice big hole for yourself to fall into and not even notice ... oh
> well :-(

Thank you for completely ignoring the second half of the message I posted.

And neener neener to you too.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Just because you find out you are
     telepathic, don't let it go to your head.

Post a reply to this message