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,FREEMAIL_FROM, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-08 21:15:25 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: kcline17@hotmail.com (Kevin Cline) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Anybody in US using ADA ? One silly idea.. Date: 8 Jan 2003 21:15:25 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.219.89.90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1042089325 17690 127.0.0.1 (9 Jan 2003 05:15:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2003 05:15:25 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32802 Date: 2003-01-09T05:15:25+00:00 List-Id: tmoran@acm.org wrote in message news:... > > And the same programmers who leak memory or create dangling pointers > > with new/delete/malloc/free would do the same thing with > > new/unchecked_deallocation. > "If there's a 'with Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation' on the body, there > ought to be a 'with Ada.Finalization' on the spec." Right. There ought to be. The same programmers who leak memory with new/delete/malloc/free are the same programmers who wouldn't use Ada.Finalization.