Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #15311 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-06-15 17:33 -0500 |
| Last post | 2012-06-19 07:46 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 84 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-15 17:33 -0500
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-15 15:55 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-15 18:12 -0500
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-15 16:31 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-15 20:00 -0500
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-16 14:39 +0200
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-06-16 12:13 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-16 00:57 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-15 15:57 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-15 18:12 -0500
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-15 20:19 -0400
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-15 19:59 -0500
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-15 21:37 -0400
Controlling the Garbage Collector "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-16 11:51 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-16 14:24 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-16 12:24 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-06-16 13:14 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-16 16:35 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-16 19:43 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-23 13:36 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-23 15:39 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-16 14:34 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-18 04:32 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-24 14:31 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-20 21:19 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-21 13:24 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-21 11:37 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Fred Greer <fggreer@nospam.invalid> - 2012-06-21 21:20 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-21 15:24 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-21 23:46 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2012-06-25 15:28 +0300
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-25 09:05 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-25 17:01 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-25 13:45 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-25 13:49 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-25 20:41 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-26 12:25 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-26 06:46 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-26 16:26 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-26 13:07 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-26 22:28 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-26 23:49 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-26 18:20 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> - 2012-06-26 21:52 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-26 20:01 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> - 2012-06-26 23:23 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-27 09:05 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-06-27 20:15 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-27 13:52 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-27 13:41 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-27 19:02 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-06-28 21:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-28 15:16 -0700
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-06-29 02:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-28 19:57 -0700
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-06-29 04:06 +0000
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2012-06-29 08:35 -0400
Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2012-06-29 08:33 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2012-06-29 08:30 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-06-29 23:04 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> - 2012-06-27 16:53 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-06-27 11:32 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> - 2012-06-27 16:54 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-27 11:45 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> - 2012-06-27 16:55 -0400
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-06-27 02:06 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-27 16:34 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-06-27 11:45 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-02 11:21 +0200
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-26 13:52 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-06-26 23:40 +0000
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-26 16:48 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-21 15:15 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-21 15:33 -0700
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-21 21:24 -0500
Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector markspace <-@.> - 2012-06-21 15:23 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-17 15:49 +0200
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-16 01:00 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-16 01:04 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-16 04:03 +0200
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2012-06-15 22:27 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-16 14:39 +0200
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2012-06-18 19:37 -0700
Re: Recommendations for Lightweight Threading? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-19 07:46 -0700
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 22:28 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <a4ukcfFk5dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #15601 |
On 26.06.2012 19:07, Eric Sosman wrote: > On 6/26/2012 12:26 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >> [...] >> Oh, seems I got the motivation wrong, then. If that was your point, >> then obviously my essay didn't address that. Just to recollect what I wrote earlier: > Long lived objects which live shorter than the application (i.e. not > classes) are actually the Achilles heel of GC because it is very hard > to tune the collector in a way that it does not visit those long > living objects too often and yet run often enough to ensure enough > free memory is available. > On 21.06.2012 20:24, Aaron W. Hsu wrote: >> Finally, there are times when I want to do a large bulk allocation >> outside of the collector, and then selectively move certain things >> into the collected space, but still have a checked, high-level way >> of accessing data structures in the uncollected space. me again: > I once mused about such a thing as well. I you think a bit longer > about this then you'll notice that it won't work: these objects still > have to be visited because they may have references to other objects > not in the uncollectable space. You'll probably do not gain much - > if anything at all. >> My motivation was having >> some large objects, whose memory could be explicitly freed, as soon as >> the memory was no longer needed in the program. > > And my question, still, is "Why?" At a guess, the intent is > to make the large objects' memory available for re-use right away, > without waiting for GC (and thereby, perhaps, reducing the number > of GC's required). But in all the scenarios so far, I think it's > been shown that the effort to support manual release safely is at > least as great as that of a GC, maybe more. I second that: if memory is low and the object is eligible for collection, GC will take it away anyway. If memory isn't low, any object lurking around doesn't hurt. In fact, it might be better to have the space occupied by a single large object instead of many small objects because that makes so many objects less to visit... Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 23:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <slrnjukijq.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #15601 |
Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> wrote: > On 6/26/2012 12:26 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >> Oh, seems I got the motivation wrong, then. If that was your point, >> then obviously my essay didn't address that. My motivation was having >> some large objects, whose memory could be explicitly freed, as soon as >> the memory was no longer needed in the program. > And my question, still, is "Why?" Why do some people prefer cars with manual gear shift? Maybe a (sub)conscious distrust in complicated technology...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 18:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <11c2c33a-ae05-4179-9a66-eee7bb90a49d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #15633 |
Andreas Leitgeb wrote: > Eric Sosman wrote: >> Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >>> Oh, seems I got the motivation wrong, then. If that was your point, >>> then obviously my essay didn't address that. My motivation was having >>> some large objects, whose memory could be explicitly freed, as soon as >>> the memory was no longer needed in the program. >> And my question, still, is "Why?" > > Why do some people prefer cars with manual gear shift? > Maybe a (sub)conscious distrust in complicated technology... Nope. My car was $800.00 less expensive with a manual transmission than with an automatic transmission. Manual gets better fuel economy. It gives better control over the vehicle, especially in inclement weather. You can drop to a lower gear and accelerate to pass more readily. Subconscious distrust of complicated technology, indeed! Sniff! It's a rational economic decision for those of us skilled enough to drive a manual transmission. -- Lew
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 21:52 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <jsdp0t$l5f$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #15640 |
On 26/06/2012 9:20 PM, Lew wrote: > Nope. > > My car was $800.00 less expensive with a manual transmission than with > an automatic transmission. Manual gets better fuel economy. It gives better > control over the vehicle, especially in inclement weather. You can drop to > a lower gear and accelerate to pass more readily. > > Subconscious distrust of complicated technology, indeed! Sniff! It's a > rational economic decision for those of us skilled enough to drive a manual > transmission. Why am I not surprised that you'd not only have one, but be snobbish about it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 20:01 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <rqtku7tt18dpm2j70o4egmo14tn7lio4ev@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15641 |
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:52:30 -0400, Highway to Hell
<HtH49439112@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 26/06/2012 9:20 PM, Lew wrote:
>> Nope.
>>
>> My car was $800.00 less expensive with a manual transmission than with
>> an automatic transmission. Manual gets better fuel economy. It gives better
>> control over the vehicle, especially in inclement weather. You can drop to
>> a lower gear and accelerate to pass more readily.
>>
>> Subconscious distrust of complicated technology, indeed! Sniff! It's a
>> rational economic decision for those of us skilled enough to drive a manual
>> transmission.
>
>Why am I not surprised that you'd not only have one, but be snobbish
>about it?
Hardly snobbish. He gave good reasons and did not lord them over
us.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Highway to Hell <HtH49439112@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-26 23:23 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <jsdub7$uff$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #15647 |
On 26/06/2012 11:01 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:52:30 -0400, Highway to Hell > <HtH49439112@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 26/06/2012 9:20 PM, Lew wrote: >>> Nope. >>> >>> My car was $800.00 less expensive with a manual transmission than with >>> an automatic transmission. Manual gets better fuel economy. It gives better >>> control over the vehicle, especially in inclement weather. You can drop to >>> a lower gear and accelerate to pass more readily. >>> >>> Subconscious distrust of complicated technology, indeed! Sniff! It's a >>> rational economic decision for those of us skilled enough to drive a manual >>> transmission. >> >> Why am I not surprised that you'd not only have one, but be snobbish >> about it? > > Hardly snobbish. I beg your *freaking* pardon? "Sniff! It's a rational blah blah for those of us skilled enough blah blah" is about as intellectually-snobbish as it gets. He clearly looks down on everyone who chooses differently than him, in that and several other arenas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-27 09:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <6nbmu7hjk5onm590mfsqdof07hmgti32k7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15651 |
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 23:23:20 -0400, Highway to Hell
<HtH49439112@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 26/06/2012 11:01 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:52:30 -0400, Highway to Hell
>> <HtH49439112@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/06/2012 9:20 PM, Lew wrote:
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>> My car was $800.00 less expensive with a manual transmission than with
>>>> an automatic transmission. Manual gets better fuel economy. It gives better
>>>> control over the vehicle, especially in inclement weather. You can drop to
>>>> a lower gear and accelerate to pass more readily.
>>>>
>>>> Subconscious distrust of complicated technology, indeed! Sniff! It's a
>>>> rational economic decision for those of us skilled enough to drive a manual
>>>> transmission.
>>>
>>> Why am I not surprised that you'd not only have one, but be snobbish
>>> about it?
>>
>> Hardly snobbish.
>
>I beg your *freaking* pardon? "Sniff! It's a rational blah blah for
>those of us skilled enough blah blah" is about as
>intellectually-snobbish as it gets. He clearly looks down on everyone
It is a tool that he says he knows how to use.
>who chooses differently than him, in that and several other arenas.
It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual
transmission.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-27 20:15 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <jsfpk8$dbj$1@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #15663 |
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:05:11 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual > transmission. > And have a license that says you're qualified to use it. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-27 13:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <2gsmu7hn45msv0p1vtlmvo6m4mdpofhtqf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15674 |
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:15:04 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:05:11 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual
>> transmission.
>>
>And have a license that says you're qualified to use it.
I think most people would understand that and such things as
needing to have hands to operate the stickshift.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-27 13:41 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <013b2aa4-a92d-41fc-a989-bc28a796f6fb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #15674 |
Martin Gregorie wrote: > Gene Wirchenko wrote: > > > It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual > > transmission. > > > And have a license that says you're qualified to use it. I live in the U.S. I know of no state here that has a separate driver's license for manual-transmission vehicles. -- Lew
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-27 19:02 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <vnenu75416se557q00gfhfgncju28cfo52@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15686 |
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:41:09 -0700 (PDT), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>
>> > It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual
>> > transmission.
>> >
>> And have a license that says you're qualified to use it.
>
>I live in the U.S. I know of no state here that has a separate driver's license
>for manual-transmission vehicles.
I think that British Columbia used to have an endorsement
required on a licence in order to be able to drive a standard. That
could be way out of date now. It was from my childhood, and I am 51
now.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-28 21:45 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <jsija2$3jh$3@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #15686 |
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:41:09 -0700, Lew wrote: > Martin Gregorie wrote: >> Gene Wirchenko wrote: >> >> > It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual >> > transmission. >> > >> And have a license that says you're qualified to use it. > > I live in the U.S. I know of no state here that has a separate driver's > license for manual-transmission vehicles. > The countries where I've obtained driving licenses (NZ and the UK) both have a restriction that prevents a person who learnt on an automatic from driving a manual shift without additional training. The opposite does not apply: learn on a manual gearbox and you're good to go on an automatic. As I stupidly did my right leg a lot damage a few years ago I'm now restricted to driving an automatic with a left-foot accelerator, which makes sense: I can drive a conventionally equipped manual Hilux pickup for short distances (2-3 km) but would not want to drive it on the road for any distance. I presume you're used to similar restrictions in the USA? -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-28 15:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) |
| Message-ID | <2052a30d-c86b-4374-9be4-a28daa7fd8e6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #15732 |
Martin Gregorie wrote: > Lew wrote: >> Martin Gregorie wrote: >>> Gene Wirchenko wrote: >>>> It is a rational choice if you know how to use a manual >>>> transmission. >>>> >>> And have a license that says you're qualified to use it. >> >> I live in the U.S. I know of no state here that has a separate driver's >> license for manual-transmission vehicles. >> > The countries where I've obtained driving licenses (NZ and the UK) both > have a restriction that prevents a person who learnt on an automatic from > driving a manual shift without additional training. The opposite does not > apply: learn on a manual gearbox and you're good to go on an automatic. > > As I stupidly did my right leg a lot damage a few years ago I'm now > restricted to driving an automatic with a left-foot accelerator, which > makes sense: I can drive a conventionally equipped manual Hilux pickup > for short distances (2-3 km) but would not want to drive it on the road > for any distance. I presume you're used to similar restrictions in the > USA? I personally am not. I know of no place in the U.S. that restricts one to driving an automatic without a certification for manual transmissions. I do not know of medical restrictions, e.g., having to have a left-foot accelerator if you cannot use the right foot, but they might well exist as that is outside my area of knowledge. I do know that if you need prescription eyewear you are not permitted to drive without it on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 02:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) |
| Message-ID | <jsj2rj$85o$1@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #15733 |
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:16:29 -0700, Lew wrote: > I personally am not. > Yes, I assumed that and was referring to general,rather than personal knowledge of driver licensing. > I know of no place in the U.S. that restricts one > to driving an automatic without a certification for manual > transmissions. I do not know of medical restrictions, e.g., having to > have a left-foot accelerator if you cannot use the right foot, but they > might well exist as that is outside my area of knowledge. > I'd be surprised if there aren't medical restrictions and/or rules about mandatory modifications to the car. > I do know that if you need prescription eyewear you are not permitted > to drive without it on. > And yet you can drive legally in California although a registered blind person, or could a few years back. Strange..... Here pilots can fly with prescription eyeglasses but *must* have a second pair with them in case the first pair gets damaged. Makes sense: landing with busted or lost glasses would be problematic. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-28 19:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) |
| Message-ID | <996qu75fr7luabmbrg3849lsgc7taj8fv7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15733 |
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:16:29 -0700 (PDT), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
wrote:
[snip]
>I personally am not. I know of no place in the U.S. that restricts one to
>driving an automatic without a certification for manual transmissions. I do
>not know of medical restrictions, e.g., having to have a left-foot accelerator
>if you cannot use the right foot, but they might well exist as that is outside
>my area of knowledge. I do know that if you need prescription eyewear you
>are not permitted to drive without it on.
Not necessarily I should think. I wear glasses, but legally (in
British Columbia), I do not have to wear them for driving as my vision
is good enough without them. They are more reading glasses with a bit
more.
Odd exceptions strike in more areas than computing!
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 04:06 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions |
| Message-ID | <jsj9k7$clf$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #15740 |
Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: (snip) > Not necessarily I should think. I wear glasses, but legally (in > British Columbia), I do not have to wear them for driving as my vision > is good enough without them. They are more reading glasses with a bit > more. If you can pass the vision test (reading a line of letters) without them, then you can drive without them. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 08:35 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions |
| Message-ID | <868ru7tlri0ipg80m0iq31jqfkeqf1g3tl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15741 |
glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > >(snip) > >> Not necessarily I should think. I wear glasses, but legally (in >> British Columbia), I do not have to wear them for driving as my vision >> is good enough without them. They are more reading glasses with a bit >> more. > >If you can pass the vision test (reading a line of letters) >without them, then you can drive without them. True. If you need eye correction to pass that test, then your license will say that you must be wearing lenses to drive your car. Hmm...I guess somebody who needed lenses on the test, then had Lasik which made him able to see, would have to go back and take the test again. -- Tim Slattery Slattery_T@bls.gov
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 08:33 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Driver's license restrictions (Was: Controlling the Garbage Collector) |
| Message-ID | <jv7ru7pg35a2f9vji8c6fjmm4bqrpjkfoj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15740 |
Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: >On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:16:29 -0700 (PDT), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> >wrote: > >[snip] > >>I personally am not. I know of no place in the U.S. that restricts one to >>driving an automatic without a certification for manual transmissions. I do >>not know of medical restrictions, e.g., having to have a left-foot accelerator >>if you cannot use the right foot, but they might well exist as that is outside >>my area of knowledge. I do know that if you need prescription eyewear you >>are not permitted to drive without it on. > > Not necessarily I should think. I wear glasses, but legally (in >British Columbia), I do not have to wear them for driving as my vision >is good enough without them. They are more reading glasses with a bit >more. Oh yeah, necessarily. I am extremely myopic, I would be a danger to myself and others without correction, even walking. My license specifies that I must be wearing corrective lenses to drive a car. Contact lenses count. Needless restriction in my case. I never move more than a few feet from my bed without either glasses or contacts. -- Tim Slattery Slattery_T@bls.gov
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 08:30 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <bm7ru79famsdet1rh2hep4vbkb2hc8il7d@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #15732 |
Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote: >The countries where I've obtained driving licenses (NZ and the UK) both >have a restriction that prevents a person who learnt on an automatic from >driving a manual shift without additional training. The opposite does not >apply: learn on a manual gearbox and you're good to go on an automatic. >As I stupidly did my right leg a lot damage a few years ago I'm now >restricted to driving an automatic with a left-foot accelerator, which >makes sense: I can drive a conventionally equipped manual Hilux pickup >for short distances (2-3 km) but would not want to drive it on the road >for any distance. I presume you're used to similar restrictions in the >USA? Not the first thing you mention, the restriction on using a manual without additional training. But I can certainly see the reason for it. As for people with right-foot problems being restricted to left-foot pedals: yes, absolutely. A few years ago my wife was having considerable problems with her right foot. She had a left-foot pedal installed, and as a condition of that, her driver's license was changed to say that she could only operate a left-foot pedal car. The flip side is that the left-foot car can only legally be operated by someone with that restriction on the license. So I wasn't supposed to drive it, even though the pedal would fold up out of the way. -- Tim Slattery Slattery_T@bls.gov
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-06-29 23:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Controlling the Garbage Collector |
| Message-ID | <jslc9o$qlt$1@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #15743 |
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:30:05 -0400, Tim Slattery wrote: > The flip side is that the left-foot car can only legally be operated by > someone with that restriction on the license. So I wasn't supposed to > drive it, even though the pedal would fold up out of the way. > Interesting. My car has an accelerator pedal on each side of the brake pedal, linked so that only one of them is usable at a time. The other one folds up away from feet on that side. IOW, anybody else can drive the car by pulling the right pedal down. Sure makes life easier for the guys in the garage when it needs servicing. In the UK this seems to be the usual setup and means that any normal driver can swap pedals and drive legally. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web