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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,aa968038a51ee866
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Q: Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation
Date: 1996/07/21
Message-ID: <Duwn9F.B0s@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 169921461
references: <31E5D4D1.11DB36E1@jinx.sckans.edu> <dewar.837178582@schonberg>
 <EACHUS.96Jul16153330@spectre.mitre.org>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


>In article <dewar.837178582@schonberg> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
>  > Thoughts?

It would really be nice if it were possible to write reusable packages
that work properly with or without GC.  Not easy, since the mere
presence of GC can affect the design (e.g. which operations get exported
from a given package).

- Bob