From: Mats Weber <Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch>
Subject: Re: Task deallocation
Date: 1997/03/03
Date: 1997-03-03T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <331B1C78.5215@elca-matrix.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: dewar.857223071@merv
> <<On a reasonable implementation, all memory will be reclaimed when the
> task terminates.>>
>
> Probably this is false, think about the implementation of the 'Terminated
> query, certainly you cannot assume it is true.
OK. How is it done in GNAT ?
Do you think that the approach of keeping a pool of unused tasks of each
task type for later recycling (as I suggested earlier in this thread,
i.e. 'manual', self-programmed memory management) is still necessary
with modern Ada 95 compilers ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-03-03 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-02-23 0:00 Task deallocation Jonas Nygren
1997-02-28 0:00 ` Mats Weber
1997-03-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-03-03 0:00 ` Mats Weber [this message]
1997-03-04 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1997-02-11 0:00 Jonas Nygren
1997-02-12 0:00 ` Mats Weber
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox