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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,faa31ce746726af0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-02 16:27:25 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!not-for-mail
From: dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada vs Modula3
Date: 2 Nov 1994 18:27:25 -0600
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services   +1 713 684 5969
Message-ID: <399apd$5lk@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
References: <37dir6$d93@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk> <CynpF4.6Mn@nntpa.cb.att.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com
Date: 1994-11-02T18:27:25-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <CynpF4.6Mn@nntpa.cb.att.com>,
Kenneth Almquist <ka@socrates.hr.att.com> wrote:
>Phil Brooke <pjb25@cam.ac.uk> asked:
>> Has anyone got any comments on the relative merits of Modula3 and Ada (9X)?
>
>One major difference is that Moldula 3 has automatic garbage collection.
>Ada implementations are not required to provide this, and most don't.
>					Kenneth Almquist

Quite true, since in Ada it's quite possible to create a dynamic
memory system and NOT generate garbage in the first place.  Nip 'em
in the bud, so to speak.

-- 
Proud (and vocal) member of Team Ada! (and Team OS/2)        ||This is not your
   	      Ada -- Very Cool.  Doesn't Suck.               ||  father's Ada 
For all sorts of interesting Ada tidbits, run the command:   ||________________
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
   ObNitPick: Spelling Ada as ADA is like spelling C++ as CPLUSPLUS. :-)