Um, no. The whole point of a GC is that you don't have to explicitely deallocate something.
GC has several functions. One of the most important ones is to make a language safe. A secondary one is to save some work in non-performance critical code. However, in performance critical code, you have to worry about memory management as much with a GC as without.
There is a reason many people want an opt-in GC in C++0x.
The primary problem with C++ is not its lack of GC, it's its lack of safety. That's not fixed by adding a GC.
Your right, nothing is confirmed but the number of 3rd party prominent players hyping things up on their own kind of assures me that there is at least some substance there. Wii Fit and Motion Plus are great examples and I think your on to something...MS probably does need to bundle in some sort of game likely a mini-game collection similar to wii sports, even the kickball demo and that Milo thing would do...just something that gives you a "natal" experience out of the box. Im expecting game bundles from MS first party studios, perhaps Lionhead or Rare offering up a Perfect Dark or Fable bundle? Of course if Halo Reach ends up with Natal support and ships as a bundle they are guaranteed millions of installs off the bat.
I'm saying that eugenics
I disagree. The idea that inferior genes will naturally die out does not logicically lead to we must kill everyone with inferior genes.
When you're running a government, it is absolutely a logical choice. What would be more preferable between suffering the damage caused by allowing the natural course of things or taking measurable action towards a given result? If you need a local example, look at the meddling our own governments do in the economy. This too would work itself out in time, and yet we meddle, because that is what people want out of a government.
This is why I wouldn't personally object to this point being made in the preface to this particular book. The salient point is simply that employing scientific logic in decisions without any attaching any form of belief system can lead to immoral situations. This point should be obvious, but really it isn't. Far too many are holding science itself up as the belief system, using studies and the like as oracles.
In my own world view, science is a source of information. An excellent one, indeed, but not any sort of moral compass at all.
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or not.
No one here has posted any source code or any legit backing for their argument.
We have either:
1. The Atom processor doesn't support some instruction set used by 10.6.2, and support has been unintentionally broken due to compiler settings or any number of changes. (Irrelevant, since Apple has no obligation to make their products to your specification.)
2. Apple has added checking for a specific CPU ID, and calls panic() or whatever because it's not an Apple approved device. (Irrelevant, since Apple has no obligation to make their products to your specification.)
Anyone care to post some evidence?
(On a side note, people who refer to companies by their stock symbol are pretentious bastards.)
Franklin was never President. He was part of the Committee Of Five that drafted the Declaration of Independence and the first Postmaster General though. He was also a polymath.
This tends to disagree with your first point.
Sure it was only a "section" of the country...but it was 55 million people. Can't really call that kind of think "overstated."
Uh huh. But you spoke as if you thought Linux should be user-friendly for everyone. Here's some other things my Linux laptop won't do properly:
- Emulate Atari, Commodore 64, or NES games
- Connect to my Netscape dialup ISP
- Run Internet Explorer
- Run Microsoft Office so I can update my resume
- Let me select a hundred songs from a window, and play them in order. Instead it tries to play all 100 at the same time?!?!?
Maybe "C", "D" and "C++" are not so bad, as they don't intersect with a very common word in plain english text.
However, they are still pretty poor choices, I agree. And having symbols in the name is the work of the devil.
We warn the reader in advance that the proof presented here depends on a clever but highly unmotivated trick. -- Howard Anton, "Elementary Linear Algebra"