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: 103376,5997b4b7b514f689
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: Reading a line of arbitrary length
Date: 1997/03/04
Message-ID: <5fh7hp$l3c@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 223001025
References: <5ds40o$rpo@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-04T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

>Jon said
>
><<Because there are areas and cases where the GC should not be simply
>"transparent".  That it should have some explicit programmer control
>available.>>
>
>Well there is a contentions statement. I strongly disagree that GC
>should not be simply transparent, and I do not like the idea of
>standardizing explicit programmer control, whatever that might be.

Well, if you require that GC be completely transparent even with
multi-language programming, you are effectively requiring conservative GC;
I don't think a standard should prohibit other approaches to GC.

>GC in SNOBOL4 is indeed transparent, and that is the way things should
>be in my opinion.

Does SNOBOL4 have a C interface?

--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>   |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>   |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3         |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.