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,ed6a891101ff4e06
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Freeing Pointers to classwide types
Date: 1998/10/09
Message-ID: <m3k92bvsup.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 399187826
Sender: matt@mheaney.ni.net
References: <1ftmFTC69GA.191@samson.airnet.net>
 <360b26a1.41575272@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net>
 <01bde866$1be8ed00$5330ea9e@UKP014459.logica.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:51:39 PDT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-10-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Bob Fletcher" <fletcherr@logica.com> writes:

> Tom Moran <tmoran@bix.com> wrote in article
> <360b26a1.41575272@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net>...
> > Of course one
> > would also hope
> >   procedure something(....) is
> >       type ptr is access ....
> >       p : ptr: := new ...
> >   ...
> >   end something
> > to free the memory pointed to by 'p' when it leaves procedure
> > something.      
> 
> Really? Isn't the object that is created by the 'new' keyword similar in
> nature to a C++ 'heap' variable, in that although the pointer may go out of
> scope the object will not, and needs to be explicitly destroyed?

No.  When you leave a frame in which an access type is declared, the
storage associated with the access type gets reclaimed automatically.