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: 103376,7aeecd1069c28415,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsread.com!newsprint.newsread.com!news.glorb.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s52.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: Freejack Subject: Objects and the Stack? User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Message-ID: Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.164.245.153 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: attbi_s52 1103236066 67.164.245.153 (Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:27:46 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:27:46 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:27:47 GMT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7003 Date: 2004-12-16T22:27:47+00:00 List-Id: It's my understanding that one can eliminate the need for pointers (access types) through prudent use of tagged types and classes. However it is also my understanding that Gnat at least, when creating instances of Foo'class, creates them on the stack. So, for kicks, I'm gonna write a package that creates a stack, with the stack being a tagged object which gets extended with each new element object that's pushed onto it. I don't see any problems with implementing this as far as the language itself is concerned. However I'm guessing the actual stack object will reach a point where it reeks hell with the system stack. Anyone here have experience with similar constructs and machinations? Just curious. Freejack