Re: memory management and productivity

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>]

18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) writes:

> Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote in message news:<mailman.151.1088083768.391.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>...
> > Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
> > 
> > > In article <bebbba07.0406222041.593ab7c3@posting.google.com>, 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) writes:
> > > 
> > > > Bingo. That's exactly what Ada should have. And it shouldn't take a
> > > > rocket scientist to figure that out.
> > > 
> > > ACT says they have not really seen market demand from their customers,
> > > and some of them are presumably rocket scientists.
> > 
> > Me, for one :).
> > 
> > I prefer to manage memory according to the needs of my algorithms and
> > applications, rather than letting some unknown algorithm attempt to do
> > it for me. Ada lets me do this quite nicely.
> 
> What's your point? 

My point is that _this_ "rocket scientist" reaches a different
conclusion than you do about the desirability of garbage collection.

> Because you don't want automated memory management, nobody else
> should want it either? 

That's not exactly my argument, but it is my conclusion, if by
"automated memory management" you mean "garbage collection, as
provided by the JVM for example".

The term "automated memory management" can mean many things, including
typical Ada use of the stack for local variables. So we need clearer
definitions before we go any farther.

> What I'm suggesting would give you what you want and it would also
> give the desktop and web developers what they want. 

I'm suggesting that "garbage collection" is not what they _need_
(different from what they _want_).

> In other words, it would make Ada a more versatile language. 

Nope.

As many have pointed out, Ada the _langauge_ allows for garbage
collection, and some implementations have provided it (JGNAT in
particular). That has not lead to commercial success. So what has
changed, that you think it will lead to commercial success now?

Ada provides better ways to manage memory, and programmers that take
the time to figure that out don't need traditional "garbage
collection".

> Maybe you don't think that's wise, but if you don't, please don't
> complain about the fact that Java dwarfs Ada in popularity (and is
> now being adapted big-time for real-time use by the military).

I've never "complained" about that. I'm disappointed in the waste of
my tax dollars, but that's nothing new :).

-- 
-- Stephe