From: Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Mission-Critical Design: Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation vs Garbage Collection
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 08:41:21 -0400
Date: 2014-07-18T08:41:21-04:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <755is9pqec24if5ecnatvc05uindaphd40@4ax.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: de300b26-804d-4c9a-8aea-e840160b735d@googlegroups.com
On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 23:17:48 -0700 (PDT), NiGHTS <nights@unku.us> declaimed
the following:
>In mission-critical design applications, do they favor garbage collectors or the unchecked deallocation?
>
Based upon the examples I've seen at work (flight management systems):
NEITHER...
Any dynamic memory gets allocated during the initialization step (based
on some configuration "file" to identify how much of each component to
create), and once that completes the only "dynamic" memory is the stack
(and not even the secondary stack used in some operations -- like run-time
string concatenation; no: put("string " & integer'image(val) & " more"); )
--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 12:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-18 6:17 Mission-Critical Design: Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation vs Garbage Collection NiGHTS
2014-07-18 6:25 ` Jeffrey Carter
2014-07-18 7:51 ` J-P. Rosen
2014-07-19 9:07 ` Pascal Obry
2014-07-18 12:41 ` Dennis Lee Bieber [this message]
2014-07-23 22:07 ` Robert A Duff
2014-07-24 1:00 ` Dennis Lee Bieber
2014-07-24 6:52 ` Simon Wright
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox