Re: Ada 0Y plans for garbage collection?

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@attbi.com>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

> But reference counting could be made much more easy and attractive if
> smart pointers have more light-weighted implementation than controlled
> types in generic packages. There are too many problems with that...

Agreed, which is why you want to use a reference counted storage pool. 
That way the count is stored with the object, and you only incur the 
overhead when you create a new counted access value.

I've done this to create a pool of fixed sized objects.  I keep 
intending to rewrite it to support variable sized objects, but it is 
always easier to create a fixed-sized reference-counted object with an 
access value into the normal heap, and do explicit deallocation of that 
object when the reference count reaches zero.

Anyone want to work with me on a "standard" reference counted storage 
pool for Ada 200Y?  The storage pool will only be a couple of pages of 
code.  The real effort is in documenting it and providing examples of use.

Or did you mean that the fact that the storage pool was a controlled 
type was a problem?  I don't see that.  Typically a program will create 
a storage pool once and then just use it.  The controlled overhead 
really only comes into play if the storage pool is located inside a 
nested procedure.

--
                                         Robert I. Eachus

"As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure." -- Jacques Chirac, 
President of France
"As far as France is concerned, you're right." -- Rush Limbaugh