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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,29850945228df59
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-17 08:31:38 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!skynet.be!skynet.be!louie!tlk!not-for-mail
Sender: lbrenta@lbrenta.corp.emc.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Boehm-Demers-Weiser conservative garbage collector and GNAT
References: <1316747.mXveBPtf0Z@linux1.krischik.com>
 <rw2wufl6po1.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbetosb.8i1.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <rw2of0x6m6j.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbetrm0.atf.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <rw2k7bk7web.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <slrnbeu1ht.big.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <Hazco47MvHdL@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <slrnbeu47b.c8f.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <rw27k7k7rgo.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
 <QdZxXhgRp7Ti@eisner.encompasserve.org>
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Date: 17 Jun 2003 17:32:53 +0200
Message-ID: <rw2wufk67oa.fsf@lbrenta.corp.emc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.190.149.159
X-Trace: 1055863897 reader0.news.skynet.be 291 fa058819/213.190.149.159:26689
X-Complaints-To: abuse@skynet.be
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39343
Date: 2003-06-17T17:32:53+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:

> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org> writes:
> 
> > Yes.  I've never really liked GC myself, but the paper that Martin
> > mentions says that programmers spend up to 30% of their time doing
> > (and debugging) memory management, and that perhaps this 30% could be
> > better spent elsewhere.
> 
> Does that paper say _Ada_ programmers spend that much time ?
> 
> If so, then programmers for some other languages must spend 110% of their
> time debugging memory managment issues.

The paper concentrates on C and C++.  While I agree that Ada
programmers tend to do less dynamic memory allocation than C/C++
people, large programs will usually have to do some.  Think about
containers.  I'd be interested to know what your personal experience
is.  I'd expect you spend less than 30% of your time but more than 0%
doing memory management.  Of course, if you only ever allocate on the
stack and never on the heap (explicitly, that is), then you have no
need for a garbage collector since you don't create any garbage :)

Other opinions? Stories of shared memory, reference counters,
automatic pointers? I'm curious.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.