From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5dacec64c8c879fa
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.222.71 with SMTP id qk7mr13817963pbc.1.1328614942625;
        Tue, 07 Feb 2012 03:42:22 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 lh20ni270308pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!db5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Gautier write-only <gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Preventing Unchecked_Deallocation?
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 03:42:22 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <07915db7-0e84-4eb5-af69-ee31e10b018f@db5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <33a35da4-6c3e-4ab4-b58f-a9d73565d79a@t30g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
 <ad427e2f-efdb-4e34-b4cf-ee55a3f8e9f5@f14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
 <f4c34323-d0d8-4315-aaaa-31c0119e2ba4@n6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>
 <4350713b-6ac3-4b22-b221-8da2bac52fea@t5g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <26e4f2a4-edae-4e37-8697-f2390e636a21@z31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.203.198.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328614942 20104 127.0.0.1 (7 Feb 2012 11:42:22
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:42:22 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: db5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=62.203.198.182;
 posting-account=gRqrnQkAAAAC_02ynnhqGk1VRQlve6ZG
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HNKUARELSC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1) AppleWebKit/535.7 (KHTML, like
 Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.77 Safari/535.7,gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-02-07T03:42:22-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 7 f=E9v, 01:14, Simon Belmont <sbelmont...@gmail.com> wrote:

> If I were king of Ada, i would just cut through the tricks and add a
> new 'reference' type; basically just syntactical sugar for a constant,
> not null, auto-dereferenced, optionally limited access type. =A0It would
> cut down on errors, simplify the syntax, and even present room for
> compile-time optimizations. =A0It's strange to me that a language of
> such a high level of abstraction when it comes to everything else
> still regards access types with the underlying 'address stored in
> memory' mentality.

Lol!
Probably if you were the king of Ada you would be in close contact
with the God of the Reference Manuals and discover that in 99% of the
cases you don't even need accesses at all (implicit or explicit, be it
called pointers or reference types) in Ada, and that you also don't
need to bother with null, not null, or dangling or not, or with
allocation, deallocation, or with garbage collection, its activation,
or its absence...
You would enjoy the easy life and look from time to time with a
spyglass the C# developers fighting with users' error boxes.
_________________________
Gautier's Ada programming
http://gautiersblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Ada
NB: follow the above link for a valid e-mail address