"- One object going out of scope may mean calling free once, but it also can trigger calling free billions of objects, even for the exact same object
- Even freeing one object can have largely varying running time, e.g. to coalesce free blocks or, because it happens to be the last block in a virtual memory region, to unmap a block of virtual memory, blocking the program potentially for an arbitrary time"
So, like C, C++, or anything else that you wouldn't call garbage collected.
"99% of apps would request it & not function without it"
Apple could refuse to publish them, then. Isn't that why we are forced to go through the App Store? Because Apple ensures every app there works in the best interest of the user?
You didn't write it, though. And it is slop. If you had actually wrote it, you might learn from some of the criticism or be able to engage with it on an objective level.
Here's to hoping for a smaller phone with a fingerprint sensor on the back and a removable battery, as it's a given graphene will get the chipset right.
The sideloading change doesn't protect against abusive household members, though. Simple lock screen hygiene and periodic reminders about invasive permissions (e.g. accessibility & location) would do more. And let us not even pretend that is the true motivation for the change. An incidental consequence that you find defensible is simply that.
- Even freeing one object can have largely varying running time, e.g. to coalesce free blocks or, because it happens to be the last block in a virtual memory region, to unmap a block of virtual memory, blocking the program potentially for an arbitrary time"
So, like C, C++, or anything else that you wouldn't call garbage collected.