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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,d067a5a7c60c3b40 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.r-kom.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!195.34.132.48.MISMATCH!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed02.chello.at!news.hispeed.ch.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <1844433.WbpAUDaKiL@linux1.krischik.com> From: Martin Krischik Subject: Re: Unchecked_Deallocation vs. delete Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 19:51:59 +0200 References: <1178728045.890171.6110@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@hispeed.ch Organization: hispeed.ch NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.73.230.248 (84.73.230.248) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 20:15:02 +0200 X-Trace: dc34c46420fa6f1ec435d32398 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15684 Date: 2007-05-09T19:51:59+02:00 List-Id: Maciej Sobczak wrote: > What's the benefit of Unchecked_Deallocation as a generic library > procedure vs. built-in deallocation operator like delete in C++? > > The disadvantage, as far as I perceive it, is that it breaks the > symmetry that should be expected with regard to the allocation > operation. If "new" is built-in, then the deallocation should be built- > in as well. Making it a generic library procedure just makes more work > for the programmers for no clear reason. > > What clear reason am I missing? Yes, Ada was designed to use garbage collected. Only the idea did not work out as the embedded market does not like garbage collection. As a result only the Ada compiler targeting Java or .NET are actually garbage collected. Now this might change and GNAT might get a collector after all. But that's just rumors but I for once would love it. There are still those little memroy blocks passed between tasks in AdaCL which are little dogy. Martin -- mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com