The God Language

[maarten van damme]

2012/1/3 J Arrizza <cppgent0 at gmail.com>

> Are you sure? There is good evidence he strongly prefers gc's. Consider
>> almost all insects; consider dung beetles specifically. Consider super
>> novas, gravity and accretion disks. Consider Disney and the Circle of Life.
>> It's pretty clear he views automated recycling as a general architectural
>> approach.
>
>
> A large benefit of a gc is it disassociates responsibility for cleanup
> from the creator of the object. Now imagine the opposite: after you died,
> you were responsible for disassembling yourself for use by others to create
> themselves (think "Soylent Green, The Next Generation"). And if you didn't
> do it, or you didn't do it properly, the world would eventually overcrowd
> and explode, leaving a core dump in space. Nice.
>


> Of course, he'd give himself a switch to turn off the gc when he really
> needed to.
>
there is no destruction/creation going on, energy is constant at all times
in a closed system. That's how I thought about it :)
If it's constant anyway he wouldn't have to bother with a gc, would he?

>I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;)
this seems rather strange doesn't it?
If something is able to do everything, he should be able to invent
something he is not able to do. if he invented something he is not able to
do, he can't do everything.
One could therefore assume it is not possible to be able to do everything :D

>Well, if you want to discuss string theory...
>
>http://xkcd.com/171/
>http://xkcd.com/397/
>
>:)
great one, I really like the first one. It's really the essence of string
theory in a way :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20120103/9d3ae779/attachment-0001.html>