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: 103376,5653f0bd43045b85 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Matthew Heaney" Subject: Re: garbage collection Date: 1999/08/21 Message-ID: <37be8604@news1.us.ibm.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 515450124 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <37be0c85@news1.us.ibm.net> X-Trace: 21 Aug 1999 10:57:08 GMT, 129.37.62.193 Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services X-Notice: should be reported to postmaster@ibm.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Mime-version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Complaints-To: postmaster@ibm.net Date: 1999-08-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Keith Thompson wrote: > "Matthew Heaney" writes: > [...] >> It would be swell if the language were amended to make access types limited; >> this would prevent any problems engendered by accidental copying of access >> objects. > > Not all access types, I hope; sometimes you do want to copy access > values! Yes, of course. Something like: type T_Access is limited access all T; This proposal has also been bandied about for another reason: it has been proffered as part of the solution to the problem of not being able to take the 'Access of a local subprogram. -- Matt It is impossible to feel great confidence in a negative theory which has always rested its main support on the weak points of its opponent. Joseph Needham, "A Mechanistic Criticism of Vitalism"