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: f849b,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public
X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public
X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 115aec,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public
X-Google-Thread: 101b33,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid101b33,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java
Date: 1999/01/19
Message-ID: <m33e58f2v2.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 434237925
Sender: matt@mheaney.ni.net
References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net>
 <tz5n2.4608$TO5.129375@ptah.visi.com> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se>
 <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <369F0592.94F9DDDA@dresdner-bank.com>
 <77pnr4$ch3$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <36A35B48.F88B0CB9@dresdner-bank.com>
 <36a364ff.27569452@news.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:47:55 PDT
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java,comp.java.advocacy,comp.realtime,comp.arch.embedded,comp.object,comp.lang.java.programmer
Date: 1999-01-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

johnb@invision.co.uk (John Birch) writes:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:03:21 +0100, James Kanze
> <James.Kanze@dresdner-bank.com> wrote:
> 
> >John Birch wrote:
> >|> The reason IMHO is that C++ inherently relies upon dynamic memory
> >|> allocation!
> >
> >I'm curious as to what makes you say this.
> 
> Simple, every creation of a non static object in C++ causes a dynamic
> memory allocation, whether by explicitly calling new, or by the
> creation of temporary objects as a side effect of operator calls. This
> memory is allocated from the stack or the heap (makes no difference
> really, it's still memory).

You seem to be using the term "dynamic memory allocation" to refer to
objects allocated on either the stack or the heap.  Please don't do
this, because it is very confusing.

Use the term "dynamic memory allocation" only to refer to memory
allocated off the heap.