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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e80a1497a689d8a5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Garbage colletion Date: 1999/11/01 Message-ID: <1999Oct31.191720.1@eisner>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 542906361 References: <38120FAF.945ADD7D@hso.link.com> <7uutgd$87h$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <19991024.18033546@db3.max5.com> <38189268.43EB150F@mail.earthlink.net> <86ogdjtdwz.fsf@ppp-115-70.villette.club-internet.fr> <7vadsp$8q61@news.cis.okstate.edu> <1999Oct28.221910.1@eisner> <7vb3c4$8a21@news.cis.okstate.edu> <7vhfsl$791$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Trace: news.decus.org 941415443 13218 KILGALLEN [216.44.122.34] Organization: LJK Software Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) writes: > * Robert Dewar wrote: >>More accurately, he said that it would not be added unless >>there was significant customer demand -- there is none! > > This typ of reasoning is invalid, because a customer who learned to deal > with a missing feature clearly does not need it afterwards. This is > especially true after all programming examples which required GC are deleted > from the hard disk. (Although they were smaller and easier to understand.) Would you suggest that compiler vendors should specifically target features their customers do not request ? In preference to features their customers _do_ request ? If adding perfect GC cost nothing, I am sure all vendors would quite happily include it. Personally, I am much more concerned with combatting defects than with new features. Larry Kilgallen