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: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony)
Subject: Re: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again,
 Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation)
Date: 1996/10/16
Message-ID: <JSA.96Oct16171527@alexandria>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 189909145
sender: news@organon.com (news)
references: <325BC3B3.41C6@hso.link.com> <dewar.845162841@merv>
organization: Organon Motives, Inc.
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-10-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <1996Oct15.150155.1@eisner> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) writes:

> It seems to me, therefore, that "has GC" does not belong in the standard
> or in an annex any more than "has an optimizing back end".  Standards
> must leave some areas for implementors to differentiate themselves,

This is not quite the same.  An optimizer is not "user visible", but a
GC should indeed have various user visible hooks for specialized
needs.  That is why an annex for it would have been appropriate (and a
damn good thing)!  It also makes it somewhat more "official" that
implementations may well have it.

/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com