Re: "new" word

[Martin Krischik <martin@krischik.com>]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:

> In article <39v2kqF636c21U1@individual.net>, Wes Groleau
> <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:
>> Robert A Duff wrote:
>>> For efficiency, an Ada implementation is likely to have it's own
>>> allocator internally, and only call malloc (or something)
>>> once in a while.
>> 
>> This assumes (1) that the Ada vendor's allocation code is efficient,
>> and/or (2) that the platform's malloc is not.
> 
> I don't know malloc, but on VMS the underlying allocation interfaces
> provide a rich variety of semantics that are just what Ada would need
> (in my opinion) for implementing storage pools, etc. 

Same for Windows or OS/2.

> I find it hard 
> to believe the same versatility would be available from a common C
> runtime library routine, but I am biased.

However, there was a discussion about the Unix and Linux services for memory
allocation - at that was very primitive indeed. No comparison to the
sophisticated memory services of the DOS world. And for Linux/Unix I can
see that using malloc is the better option. Besides: it makes Interfaces.C
much easier.

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com