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,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-11 08:04:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!207.115.63.138!newscon04.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr11.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Pat Rogers" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3BC30674.BA88AAB6@brighton.ac.uk> <9pvv3t$ves$1@news.huji.ac.il> <9q49fc$nh3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <_gix7.24513$ev2.32605@www.newsranger.com> Subject: Re: why not 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 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.191.176.121 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr11.news.prodigy.com 1002811079 ST000 208.191.176.121 (Thu, 11 Oct 2001 10:37:59 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 10:37:59 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: FKPO@MONFJVMQVPXJZDBNFXBBZ\LPCXLLBWLOOAFJYWZUYICD^RAQBKZQTZTX\_I[^G_KGFNON[ZOE_AZNVO^\XGGNTCIRPIJH[@RQKBXLRZ@CD^HKANYVW@RLGEZEJN@\_WZJBNZYYKVIOR]T]MNMG_Z[YVWSCH_Q[GPC_A@CARQVXDSDA^M]@DRVUM@RBM Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 14:37:59 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14267 Date: 2001-10-11T14:37:59+00:00 List-Id: "Ted Dennison" wrote in message news:_gix7.24513$ev2.32605@www.newsranger.com... > In article <9q49fc$nh3$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says... > >It ought to be noted that something like the Booch components are not going > >to be suitable for all applications. If they rely on dynamic memory, they > >may be unsuitable for any sort of realtime work. If they rely on fixed > >memory, they may not be suitable for very dynamic workstation apps. If they > > They actually provide both. For each container there's a "bounded" and an > "unbounded" version. However, I found to my dismay that the algorithms for > dealing with the "bounded" versions are not always heap-free. Can you be more specific? Which one(s)? For example I just looked at the bounded queue package and don't see any. A quick "grep" shows none for the bounded components but it was quick-and-dirty.