The divine plan is missing GNU/Hurd... or is that fate truly so unspeakably horrible?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Actually, the question is have Google and MS indemnified developers. I beleive the answer is yes.
I'm not so sure about that. While there haven't been lawsuits (yet), Lodsys has already claimed that both companies have purchased their patent license (thus implying that they think it's valid - or at least valid enough that it's cheaper to license than to argue in court), but said license only covers those companies, and not their customers. I don't think there has been any official reaction to that... we shall see.
Of course, it may just as well result in Google and MS joining forces with Apple on this particular suit.
I'm sorry, but I have no idea what this means. The issue here is why the scope of variable "local_i" - which syntactically belongs to the body of the for-loop - is not the body of that loop, but rather the entire function "foo". This has absolutely nothing to do with a closure inside that body, except for the fact that it is a convenient real-world scenario where this matters in a very noticeable way.
If anything, you should expect foo to complete and therefore i to be out-of-scope (undefined) when the function is executed asynchronously
I wouldn't expect this from any high-level programming language (i.e. not C++) which has closures. That a closure extends the lifetime of variables it captures has been the norm since, um, the very first Lisp 50 years ago?
They are on the same side as Sony in this.
Not exactly, no. They're just mad at everyone involved or thought to be involved in any way - Sony, hackers, Geohot and his fanbois etc - and would gladly put them all on the chopping block. The difference right now is that hackers are still anonymous, whereas Sony is not, so they're first on the line.