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,ed6a891101ff4e06 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Pat Rogers" Subject: Re: Freeing Pointers to classwide types Date: 1998/10/12 Message-ID: <6vtbr7$2t0$1@uuneo.neosoft.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 400296606 References: <1ftmFTC69GA.191@samson.airnet.net> <360b26a1.41575272@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net> <01bde866$1be8ed00$5330ea9e@UKP014459.logica.co.uk> <36222676.182518AA@elca-matrix.ch> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Organization: NeoSoft, Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-10-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Mats Weber wrote in message <36222676.182518AA@elca-matrix.ch>... >Matthew Heaney wrote: > >> No. When you leave a frame in which an access type is declared, the >> storage associated with the access type gets reclaimed automatically. > >I am almost sure that this is not required by the standard. It is guaranteed *if one specifies a storage size*, by RM 13.11(18): 18 If Storage_Size is specified for an access type, then the Storage_Size of this pool is at least that requested, and the storage for the pool is reclaimed when the master containing the declaration of the access type is left. ... -- pat Patrick Rogers http://www.classwide.com progers@acm.org