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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4c86cf2332cbe682
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-01-22 10:09:48 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!noc.near.net!inmet!henning!stt
From: stt@henning.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft)
Subject: Re: Ada.strings.bounded problems?
Message-ID: <D2tJsD.4FC@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.
References: <TARJEIJ.95Jan11183331@ulrik.uio.no> <D29L78.J9@nntpa.cb.att.com>
 <D2J8H0.DMu@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 1995 18:09:48 GMT
Date: 1995-01-22T18:09:48+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <D2J8H0.DMu@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu>,
Mars J. Gralia <gralia@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu> wrote:

>ka@socrates.hr.att.com (Kenneth Almquist) writes:
>> ... Often it is better in the long
>>run to use unbounded strings in place of bounded strings, so your code
>>doesn't have to change if ...
>
>Hummm.  My programs are supposed to run for years without rebooting.
>And typical memory is 16 Mbytes/no_disk. Doesn't that rule out
>unbounded strings for me?

No, not necessarily.  Unbounded strings are required to be implemented
in a way that does not "leak" storage, presumably using a "controlled"
type.  Of course, one may still get fragmentation of the heap, though
that can be bounded if you are willing to implement your own storage pool,
and perhaps use an extra level of indirection in the implementation of
bounded strings (to allow easy compactification).

-Tucker Taft  stt@inmet.com
Intermetrics, Inc.