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: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Garbage Collection in Ada
Date: 1996/10/17
Message-ID: <1996Oct17.122921.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 190095380
x-nntp-posting-host: eisner.decus.org
references: <01bbb910$f1e73f60$829d6482@joy.ericsson.se>
 <199610162305033003135@dialup100-4-3.swipnet.se> <dewar.845506067@merv>
 <3265BD97.41C6@mti.sgi.com> <DzFA2u.Aw@world.std.com>
x-nntp-posting-user: KILGALLEN
x-trace: 845569769/23373
organization: LJK Software
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-10-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <DzFA2u.Aw@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) writes:

> Well, you can write "The implementation shall do garbage collection." in
> a language definition, and this statement might have the desired effect
> on compiler writers, but I don't know what it means in any *formal*
> sense.

For a problematic example one can look at the Macintosh Resource
Manager system calls, where ownership of a block of memory and
rules regarding who should dispose of it change merrily back
and forth between program and OS depending on the semantics
of what might seem like unrelated system calls.

Larry Kilgallen