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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-03 14:23:39 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!tiscali!newsfeed1.ip.tiscali.net!news.worldonline.be!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping
 language)
Date: 04 Apr 2004 00:26:05 +0200
Organization: Worldonline Belgium
Sender: lbrenta@deuteronomy
Message-ID: <87vfkgy9z6.fsf@insalien.org>
References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org>
 <mailman.3.1076142690.295.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <m3isij11u4.fsf_-_@insalien.org>
 <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com>
 <m3smhmz2fo.fsf@insalien.org> <rxmbc.53$bh.32@lakeread02>
 <pan.2004.04.02.23.55.20.921881@email.ro> <87r7v5zao0.fsf@insalien.org>
 <6803831.c4KqqVc08g@linux1.krischik.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83-134-242-121.lindthout.goplus.fastdsl.tiscali.be
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.worldonline.be 1081031018 4851 83.134.242.121 (3 Apr 2004
 22:23:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldonline.be
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 22:23:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6732
Date: 2004-04-04T00:26:05+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Martin Krischik writes:
> Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> 
> > David Starner writes:
> >> On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 18:18:42 -0500, Beth Bruzan wrote:
> >> > However, with proper design
> >> > and implementation, Ada does not need garbage collection,
> >> 
> >> And with proper design and implementation, C does not need bounds
> >> checking. If your allocation and deallocation is trivial, you don't
> >> need garbage collection; but if you look at something like GCC, they
> >> implemented garbage collection in C because it was too much work to
> >> keep track of the allocations. I have no doubt they would have done
> >> the same thing in Ada.
> > 
> > This turned out not to work that well; there have been large
> > performance and memory footprint concerns in GCC because of GC.  Linus
> > Torvalds recommends reference counting as a better, more predictable
> > and more efficient mechanism.
> 
> True, but for reference counting everybody has to play by the rules.

Is this not a strength rather than a weakness?  Garbage collectors
encourage sloppy programming.  I have seen this phenomenon in action.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.