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: 103376,5d3a1501d97dab65 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Jonas Nygren Subject: Re: C to Ada : a piece of code Date: 1996/09/11 Message-ID: <32372F42.19CB@joy.ericsson.se>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 180014313 references: <3231732C.2781@virgoa4.in2p3.fr> <01bb9d61$537fe5e0$2b8371a5@dhoossr.iquest.com> <01bb9e40$d0312d80$348371a5@dhoossr.iquest.com> <514lpk$i0m@fozzie.sun3.iaf.nl> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Ericsson mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I) Date: 1996-09-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > iGeert said, regarding virtual origins > > "Please, don't do this! It is possible, but certainly not perfect! If > applications are long-lived and they dynamically allocate memory at a > certain rate, garbage collection is necessary for keeping the language > safe. > > Since Ada-compilers do not provide garbage collection (sad, but still > true), users depend on being able to add a conservative garbage > collector. Conservative garbage collectors depend on pointers to > objects be stored in a fixed format. Having virtual origins breaks all > conservative garbage collectors and makes it almost impossible for a > third party to add garbage collection to the compiler." > > Nothing to worry about, obviously the use of virtual origins is only > possible with fat pointers. So just use thin pointers for your garbage > collected environment. What is the Ada syntax for fat pointers versus thin pointers? (by now many of you know I am an Ada novice, but I have never encountered thin/fat pointers in the RM vocabulary, so I just want to educate myself). /jonas