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
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c1b1b81e16e83802
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-01 02:06:53 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: vashwath@rediffmail.com (prashna)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Help-memory allocation
Date: 1 Jul 2003 02:06:52 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <d40d7104.0307010106.667222e4@posting.google.com>
References: <d40d7104.0306300111.204fc99e@posting.google.com>
 <bdov56$v7na6$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de> <87y8zjvckv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.90.112.53
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1057050413 2870 127.0.0.1 (1 Jul 2003 09:06:53
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Jul 2003 09:06:53 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39949
Date: 2003-07-01T09:06:53+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> 
> In conforming implementations, yes.  However, many Ada implementations
> will only raise Storage_Error at some later point in the execution of
> the program ("commit on allocate" vs. "commit on use").

Don't you think "commit on allocate" is better choice?