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: 103376,3ccb707f4c91a5f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Dave Subject: Re: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again, Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation) Date: 1996/10/11 Message-ID: <325E9110.1D16@gte.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 188788343 references: <325BC3B3.41C6@hso.link.com> <325D7F9B.2A8B@gte.net> <325E452E.265C@gsfc.nasa.gov> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: GTE Intelligent Network Services, GTE INS mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Date: 1996-10-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Stephen Leake wrote: > > Dave wrote: > > > > Garbage collection, by itself, is significant enough for one to > > seriously consider choosing Java over Ada for projects which do not > > require low-level timing control. > > The Ada _language_ supports garbage collection, just as the Java > _language_ does. The Java Virtual Machine implements it, while most Ada > runtimes do not. Intermetrics AppletMagic uses the JVM garbage > collection with Ada95. > > People do get confused :-) As I understand it (I might be wrong.), the Ada95 standard does not include true garbage collection, but, instead, it has something called garbage reduction. Garbage reduction, apparently, is not as efficient as garbage collection, and, I am told, you risk filling up memory if you rely on it for a large, complex application. I am very pleased to see that Intermetrics has developed a true garbage collector for Ada95. Can this be used as a third-party product to add garbage collection to any Ada95 system. If so, then quite a few companies would be wise to reconsider Ada95 before starting their next project. -- Dave Jones