>Manual heap allocation can slow the program down non-trivially compared to using an arena
But GC has nothing to do with whether heap allocations 'slow the program down', it's who owns the lifetime of the allocated object - for GC not the programmer, but the runtime.
If I create a an object, and then then soon after deref it [MyObj release], then I know it will dealloc immediately after. I'm basically in control of its lifetime, even though it's ref counted.
If I call [MyObj free] and it's still owned by another object (e.g. I added it to some collection), that's OK because the object is still useful and has a lifetime outside of my control, and its destruction will be deferred until it doesn't.
But, with a GC object, if I call new MyObj() and then soon after try my best to destroy it, I can't because I'm not in control of its lifetime, the runtime is.
That's what I see the distinction between GC and ref counted (not GC), and why I mostly don't agree with so many people here insisting that ref counting is garbage collection. How can it be when I can easily be explicitly in control of an objects lifetime? I create it, then I destroy it, and it happens exactly in the sequence that I dictate.
For sure, ARC makes it a bit more subtle, but even then, I can reliably predict when an object will be destroyed and factor that into the sequence of events in my program.
I'm surprised at the negativity your approach seems to have sparked in a few, but I found it really great, probably very effective as well and will probably start to use it at some point.
I'd have to say that when the UK initially joined the EU most people probably didn't notice much of a difference, except that the euro made going on holiday and using the local currency a lot easier (I still remember the Lira in Italy being particularly difficult to get my head around). But otherwise it didn't make much of a difference in day-to-day life for most.
But now, leaving seems to be like constantly picking at a festering scab.
I don't have the source right now, but I believe a lot of the algorithms used are set in build time #defines so it might be possible to capture them at build time and store them with the encrypted data.
Means you'd have to find a compiled lib with the exact same settings to decrypt them though.
Hmm, I wonder if that's what the second mission was to find?
I played it on the CBM64, and seem to remember being given a mission to find a stealth ship. Flew around loads, but never found it as far as I can remember.
> plus LOBs which are almost always web apps these days.
And this is where Linux won over MS - it wasn't on the desktop (which is still a mostly terrible experience to this day), but in the server room.
Coupled with Java or Perl and OSS Databases (MySQL and Postgres), people began moving software off the desktop and onto websites. Better web browsers (something else MS tried to dominate and were rebuffed) also helped. This cut MS out of the loop on new popular web servers (apache), protocols, languages and infrastructure - probably deliberately. This then allowed alternative platforms like the new iPhone and later android to gain a niche which they've since expanded massively.
I think people saw the monoculture that was developing around Windows (from days of XP onwards), and didn't like it, so actively sought to make their own path, Linux became was keystone there (could have been BSD though also...).
Also (I'm hoping) the trauma of taking another person's life must be hugely upsetting. I'm hoping it's not something you do lightly, and is not without personal consequences (guilt,shame, shock,.. dunno).
Another way to turn it into a more competitive market is to introduce large competition in the form of not for profit housing co-ops where the coop buys to rent houses, renters have to buy into the coop, and all profits are put into either buying or building new houses.
The coops keep their rents below that of the competition to attract new members, and can even reduce the rents after the initial outlay has been payed off.
This would then create a number of large semi-altruistic competitors that would throw sand into the capitalistic machine and inhibit price gouging.
> The quality of life has dropped dramatically in the original EU countries.
That doesn't reflect the reality that I see at all. The only area where quality of life is worse than previous generations is
in property ownership - particularly in bigger cities and suburbs. But that's reflected across many industrialised nations from UK, Canada,
NZ, Australia, so it's not a problem just limited to EU countries.
Otherwise the net price of "stuff" from electronics, cars, food, clothes, shoes and household accessories have fallen a lot in real terms and
people have lots more than ever before - maybe too much ?
Because... they ruined it.