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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3498dd887729ed19 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: lars.farm@ite.mh.se (Lars Farm) Subject: Re: Garbage Collection in Ada Date: 1996/10/21 Message-ID: <19961021092404210786@dialup116-6-9.swipnet.se>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 190912004 references: <01bbb910$f1e73f60$829d6482@joy.ericsson.se> <199610132138291604607@dialup101-6-14.swipnet.se> <19961014235451303023@dialup118-1-7.swipnet.se> <19961016113936528855@dialup120-4-1.swipnet.se> <199610191920401982154@dialup119-3-12.swipnet.se> organization: pv nntp-posting-user: s-49817 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-10-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > You can certainly imagine a system that provides conservative garbage > collection as a standard part of a compiler, or even just a standard > system library. But I don't know of any such commercial products, do you? A question of definitions, perhaps. Would you agree that the built in new/delete is part of the runtime system in C++? Users may legaly replace the global new/delete. Wouldn't the replacement then be part of the runtime system? Note, replacements are subject to the same requirements as the built in new/delete. Boehms collecting allocator (and others) replaces the global new/delete via this mechanism. Is'nt it then part of the runtime system? I think a general purpose GC allocator must be viewed as part of the runtime system even if you bought that part of the runtime system from some other vendor than the compiler. Does Ada have a similar mechanism? Or is Ada's optional GC purely the vendors option? -- Lars Farm, lars.farm@ite.mh.se