From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Stack based allocation vs. Dynamic allocation
Date: 2000/06/05
Date: 2000-06-05T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8hf7j2$7s0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: dale-B8D55E.22230631052000@news.rmit.edu.au
In article <dale-B8D55E.22230631052000@news.rmit.edu.au>,
Dale Stanbrough <dale@cs.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
> Interesting to note of course that the Ada heap version
> is -so- much cheaper than the C version. Presumably they are
> calling different allocators.
Just shows that the measurements are bogus, because in fact
GNAT uses normal malloc/free, just like C!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-06-05 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-05-31 0:00 Stack based allocation vs. Dynamic allocation dale
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Ray Blaak
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
2000-06-01 0:00 ` Matthew Woodcraft
2000-06-01 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
2000-06-05 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Gisle S�lensminde
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Gisle S�lensminde
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Aaro Koskinen
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
2000-05-31 0:00 ` Aaro Koskinen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox