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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,345a8b767542016e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-15 17:00:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!btnet-peer1!btnet-peer0!btnet!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: memory leakages with Ada? Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:20:04 -0500 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <3c90af1e@news.starhub.net.sg> <3c91bfa3.1987537@news.demon.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1016202006 6088 136.170.200.133 (15 Mar 2002 14:20:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Mar 2002 14:20:06 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21311 Date: 2002-03-15T14:20:06+00:00 List-Id: Clearly, there will be stylistic differences depending on the methodology employed in designing the program. Object Oriented stuff tends to deal with things easier if you have pointers to things. Hence OOP stuff in Ada would have more dynamic allocation than a functional approach or some other strategy. I'll concede that point. But being an active C programmer at the moment (and sadly shaking my head and telling my associates "It doesn't have to be this way..." as we spend months debugging and chasing among other typical C problems - memory leaks) I find myself having to deal with dynamically allocated data in the most mundane of circumstances - often because that's just what many of the library calls return to you. (The libraries we are using - not necessarily the standard C libraries.) You just find yourself doing mallocs (Bumper sticker: "Free The Mallocs!") all over the place and referencing things with pointers all the time just because that's the way C wants you to do it. Ada doesn't make it necessary to use dynamic allocation or pointers to do mundane tasks. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "John McCabe" wrote in message news:3c91bfa3.1987537@news.demon.co.uk... > > I'm not convinced this comment is 100% valid, from having worked on > large scale Object-Oriented Ada projects over the last 3 years or so > where there has been significant (if not huge) amounts of dynamic > allocation. It is at least partially true in that you can often > restructure your code to avoid dynamic allocation, but...