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: 103376,21960280f1d61e84
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!homer!news.glorb.com!news-spur1.glorb.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!edtnps90.POSTED!023a3d7c!not-for-mail
Sender: blaak@METROID
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
References: <1169636785.504223.139630@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
 <u7iv8o16m.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <3pejpgfbki.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <epkcru$fk2$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <njirepncb0.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eppn6r$m41$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <vwbqkffq94.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eputhf$p8u$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <dzsldoachu.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eq6v5b$bsb$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <l5iregra8a.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eq9gv3$dre$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <il64aftsq7.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eqa2j8$mfu$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <uveiftbyu.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <1ic9j6bmbl0ik.gvgqhl1ixvxk$.dlg@40tude.net> <eqc0ki$e2d$1@cernne03.cern.ch>
 <1v9qweobb6xei.z5hdupxed63u.dlg@40tude.net> <eqhanb$kgj$1@cernne03.cern.ch>
 <urzykwg4pvo5$.ixt0x13xyd27$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <uabzn19x5.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net> <788f7mqo6z5y.vpcslak65koq.dlg@40tude.net>
From: Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
Organization: The Transcend
Message-ID: <u64ab17mx.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:57:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.66.252.228
X-Trace: edtnps90 1171047446 208.66.252.228 (Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:57:26 MST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:57:26 MST
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:9208
Date: 2007-02-09T18:57:26+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:08:06 GMT, Ray Blaak wrote:
> 
> > "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
> >> It is still broken, because when you remove a connection (non-directed)
> >> between two nodes you don't know which of them should/may/can fall on the
> >> floor. This information is locally missing. It could be deduced from some
> >> transitive client-master/reference-target relation, but we have demolished
> >> that relation just before by introducing cycles.
> > 
> > Not really. You program according to a principle of locality of use. Some code
> > says "I no longer need this data", and lets go of it, without regard to
> > whether or not it is still in use somewhere else.
> 
> The point is that "I don't need the node A here" /= "There is no link
> between A and B."

In practice it doesn't matter. A can easily "know" it is not using B. That B is
still using A is not an issue, at least in terms of memory management.

> You are making a jump from resource management to program correctness. An
> analogous statement would be: "every computation is correct because the CPU
> does not make errors while summing numbers."

I am not talking "program" correctness, only "resource" correctness.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.