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: 103376,924aad49bcf9e4e7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Cumbersome Polymorphism
Date: 1997/01/29
Message-ID: <dewar.854545926@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 213029789
references: <32E7ABE8.3BF3@eurocontrol.fr> <5c9put$48t@hetre.wanadoo.fr>
 	<E4KKqz.CJM@world.std.com> <32EAA1A0.7C43@jmpstart.com>
 	<dewar.854255869@merv> <JSA.97Jan27145652@alexandria>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"> It is perfectly possible to hide allocation and deallocatoin from an
> Ada programmer -- just look at Ada.Unbounded.Strings as an example.
> Note that this also shows that variable length items can be handled
> in a completely transparent manner."


It is not at all clear that garbage collection would increase the efficiency
of an implementatoin of unbounded strings in the general case, what other
data do you have besides intuition for such a claim (and remember from my
SPITBOL background that I am a little familiar with GC, also see the 1977
paper in SP&E :-)