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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,21960280f1d61e84
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
References: <1169636785.504223.139630@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
 <SJudnfsXuZsDLyrYnZ2dnUVZ_t6qnZ2d@comcast.com>
 <45b8361a_5@news.bluewin.ch> <m7ejpj5u9t.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <u7iv8o16m.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <3pejpgfbki.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <epkcru$fk2$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <njirepncb0.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eppn6r$m41$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <vwbqkffq94.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eputhf$p8u$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <dzsldoachu.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eq6v5b$bsb$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <l5iregra8a.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eq9gv3$dre$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <il64aftsq7.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eqa2j8$mfu$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <uveiftbyu.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <1ic9j6bmbl0ik.gvgqhl1ixvxk$.dlg@40tude.net>
From: Markus E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Organization: N/A
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:28:34 +0100
Message-ID: <gwy7nbxhrh.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dfaKo5I0FcVdR+Mvm5yRTlFDwiA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.224.62
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1170786209 88.72.224.62 (6 Feb 2007 19:23:29 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!news.tele.dk!feed118.news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news-fra1.dfn.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:9101
Date: 2007-02-06T19:28:34+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:47:25 GMT, Ray Blaak wrote:
>
>> Maciej Sobczak <no.spam@no.spam.com> writes:
>>> OK. What about refcounting with smart pointers?
>> 
>> This form of GC actually works against your determinism goal. It simply is a
>> poor form of GC, can't handle cycles, and has unpredictable execution times.
>
> Determinism /= time bounded.
>
> For handling cycles there are weak pointers.

No. For handling cycles there are GC algorithms that can handle
cycles. Weak pointers are for implementing caching of costly (in terms
of memory) but recomuptable objects/structurs.

You're again talking from a parallel universe.

Regards -- Markus