Re: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again, Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation)

[davedave@io.com]

Jon S Anthony wrote:
> 
> But *languages* don't have GC.  Implementations of them do.  Even
> Meyer says little about GC in ETL - just that all *implementations*
> are *expected* to have it.
> 

Yes, that is correct:  Languages do not have garbage collectors -- 
implementations do.  (In fact, according to the copy of ETL which I 
have, garbage collection is merely recommended -- not required -- for 
Eiffel implementations.)  So, strictly speaking, I was wrong when I said 
that Java is a language with garbage collection and Ada is not.

However, suppose you were in the position of a software engineer who 
needed to choose between Java and Ada.  Suppose also that garbage 
collection was high on your list of "must haves".  Well, you could wait 
until Intermetric's Applet Magic gets out of beta (and becomes available 
on your platform).  Or you could pay someone to write an add-on garbage 
collector for your compiler and hope that they finish on-time.  Or you 
could get a Java (or Eiffel or Smalltalk or Lisp) system and start 
working now.

If you were in this situation, then from your viewpoint, it might make 
sense to say that Java has garbage collection and Ada does not.  
Nevertheless, you are correct:  Strictly speaking, neither language has 
garbage collection.  *** The world would be a much better place if we 
would all express ourselves with greater clarity and precision, so 
thanks to Jon -- and everyone else -- for pointing out my error. ***

BTW:  I have heard that, for C++, someone has written a garbage 
collector which can be added to almost any C++ program.  Would it be any 
more difficult to do the same thing for Ada95?  I would certainly look 
forward to such a product.  IMHO, memory management is something that a 
machine should do (whenever possible) -- freeing up humans to do things 
which require more skill and creativity.

Thanks again for pointing out my error.

-- Dave Jones