From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Subject: Re: Why people wants to complicate code with Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation?
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:51:11 +0200
Date: 2006-07-26T21:48:13+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1153943470.4980.19.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44c7c3d3$0$47958$4fafbaef@reader3.news.tin.it>
On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 21:34 +0200, fabio de francesco wrote:
> "If storage for allocated object
> is plentiful,...
> Does it mean that, for safety sake, programmers should not care about memory
> consumption?
A program, run once an hour, to see how many new items have
been added to a database, report the number, and be done,
may well leave memory management to the system facilities IMHO.
That's safe, too, because I can't pass the wrong pointer
to an Unchecked_Deallocation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-26 19:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-26 19:34 Why people wants to complicate code with Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation? fabio de francesco
2006-07-26 19:51 ` Georg Bauhaus [this message]
2006-07-26 19:56 ` Simon Wright
2006-07-26 21:28 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2006-07-27 15:49 ` adaworks
2006-07-27 19:11 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2006-07-27 22:52 ` Simon Wright
2006-07-27 23:28 ` Robert A Duff
2006-07-27 0:07 ` Peter C. Chapin
2006-07-27 11:54 ` gautier_niouzes
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox