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,f03afc58e3eb222
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Java vs Ada 95
Date: 1996/10/23
Message-ID: <1996Oct22.214341.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 191370399
x-nntp-posting-host: eisner.decus.org
references: <96102116593631@psavax.pwfl.com>
x-nntp-posting-user: KILGALLEN
x-trace: 846035031/6375
organization: LJK Software
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-10-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <96102116593631@psavax.pwfl.com>, "Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93" <condicma@PWFL.COM> writes:

>     However, there *might* be some advantage in a language standard to
>     saying something to the effect that: "If an implementation
>     provides garbage collection, then the following constraints
>     apply..." Then outline some minimal set of expected behavior as it
>     may apply to program correctness, error detection, exceptional
>     conditions or whatever else may be a concern for *language*
>     behavior. (If the garbage collection is truly invisible, except
>     for performance or space issues, then it doesn't need to be
>     specified by the language standard, eh?)

Well the issue of _knowing_ whether the compiler supports GC has been
raised, and there are probably two forms for that:

     - ability for a program to specify that gc is expected

     - ability for a running program to determine whether gc is present

Larry Kilgallen