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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b99897135d6631cc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s52.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: tmoran@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: memory management and productivity References: X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader Message-ID: <2O9Ac.44087$2i5.29095@attbi_s52> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.6.132.82 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: attbi_s52 1087449342 24.6.132.82 (Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:15:42 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:15:42 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:15:42 GMT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1601 Date: 2004-06-17T05:15:42+00:00 List-Id: >If your programming language allows you to grab a >chunk of memory without thinking about how it's going to be released >when you're done with it, you're using a managed-memory language, and >you are going to be much more efficient than someone using a language >in which you have to explicitly manage memory. I guess Ada is a managed-memory language then, since I normally grab a chunk of memory without thinking about how it's going to be released. In fact I don't even think about whether the compiler might actually be doing a heap allocation with hidden pointer, or doing the stack allocation that appears to be happening. And when I use a Controlled type from some library, I let its Finalize do any memory worrying that's needed. Only on rare occasions do I explicitly do a "new" and have to remember to do a "Free". But I sincerely doubt anyway that memory management is the proverbial silver bullet. Yes, it's faster, as well as less buggy, to program in Ada, but it's still not a snap.