Re: A suggestion for resource management

[Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>]

On 8/21/10 11:01 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Niklas Holsti:

>> [One may use blocks, this is Ada.]
>>
>> I find that form clear and brief enough, although I admit that
>> nesting depth may become awkwardly large (the remedy is to split the
>> procedure).
>
> No one will write such code unless forced to do so by some static
> analysis tool.  It's rather messy.

(Even though there is some evidence that block nesting and
disciplined manual cleanup has been considered messy here
and there, backing this claim with data will help.
Recent Python development may be a source of evidence,  e.g.
counting cleanup Bugs in old Python from a big installation
such as Google App Engine, versus new Python and whatever
programs are available for statistical analysis.)


Wouldn't a new type based hook into the object life cycle
fit the language better?  At least if you use types to
encapsulate objects that belong together.

Wouldn't have compatibility problems, either, would it?

Scope(whatever) ...; looks like a solution typical of {} languages:
compare its "flexibility" with the "flexibility" of goto in C and Ada,
respectively.  I find it too compiler-writer-oriented, and somewhat
ad hoc in use.  How can it be bridled?

Just my 2c.


Georg