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: 103376,29850945228df59
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-17 05:55:23 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!sn-xit-09!supernews.com!216.170.153.135.MISMATCH!tdsnet-transit!newspeer.tds.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Boehm-Demers-Weiser conservative garbage collector and GNAT
Date: 17 Jun 2003 07:55:16 -0500
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <Hazco47MvHdL@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <1316747.mXveBPtf0Z@linux1.krischik.com>
 <rw2wufl6po1.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbetosb.8i1.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <rw2of0x6m6j.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbetrm0.atf.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <rw2k7bk7web.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbeu1ht.big.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1055854482 31466 192.135.80.34 (17 Jun 2003
 12:54:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 12:54:42 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39327
Date: 2003-06-17T07:55:16-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <slrnbeu1ht.big.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>> Correct, but this IMHO would the programmer's fault, not GCC's.  The
>> ARM (13.11.1) says that implementations may provide GC at their
>> option; I suppose that portable programs must be aware of this and
>> always use Free, no matter what, in order to work on all
>> implementations.  It is trivial for a GC-enabled implementation to
>> provide a no-op version of Free.  Also, appropriate use of pragma
>> Controlled could be required.
> 
> So in effect the GC would only be a bonus to prevent memory leaks due to
> errors in the program?

It would be a way to spend overhead to make up for a lack of cleanup
in the programming.