Re: Beginner's questions

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com>]

In article <373248e7@eeyore.callnetuk.com>,
  "Nick Roberts" <nickroberts@callnetuk.com> wrote:

> I continue the question the fashion (for that's what I believe it is) for
> Ada implementations not to support garbage collection.  For the vast
> majority of string-related applications, the 'inefficiency' of dynamic
> allocation---even with a garbage collector, provided it's a half-decent
> one---is not a problem.

This is nothing to do with fashion, it is to do with user requirements.
All that is needed to make garbage collection appear in GNAT for example
is some customer who really needs it and is willing to fund at least part
of the development cost.

We have a long list of desirable improvements for GNAT. You see a chunk
of this list bitten off for each new release (each GNAT release so far
has had substantial new functionality, and this will continue to be the
case -- you should get to see the 3.12 list very shortly, I already posted
a small preview).

The prioritization of these improvements is driven partly from what we
think will be generally useful, but mostly from customer requirements.

Note that it is perfectly posssible to use any one of several conservative
garbage collectors with GNAT. Indeed, we have delayed using virtual origins
for arrays (one of the improvements on our list, which would noticeably
improve efficiency, especially of Fortran type numeric codes), precisely
because it would be incompatible with such collectors.

Why don't these meet your needs?

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own