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: 103376,3ccb707f4c91a5f2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again,
 Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation)
Date: 1996/11/01
Message-ID: <EACHUS.96Nov1103759@spectre.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 193988669
references: <325BC3B3.41C6@hso.link.com>
 <Dz2B9H.9HD.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <JSA.96Oct31145647@alexandria> jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) writes:

  > You could do something similar for an Unbounded_String impl, and then
  > you would have a specific type which had GC in your implementation.
  > But it would not be based on malloc/adjusting/copying/freeing (which
  > will never be able to compete here).

    Yes, an implementation of Unbounded_String which uses reference
counts and lazy copying would work much better in this case.  It is a
perfectly legal and reasonable implementation of Unbounded_String, and
it looks like it would take a day or two to gin up.  The question is
whether it would be a global win, or just specific to some cases.  My
guess is that it is a net win in general, but only a few percent. I
may try it, but not this week.

    Besides, it would be better to do it against 3.07 to get a real
comparison.


--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...