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!edtnps89.POSTED!023a3d7c!not-for-mail
Sender: blaak@METROID
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: in defense of GC (was Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?)
References: <1169531612.200010.153120@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <L2ith.12633$ji1.1337@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net>
 <mailman.44.1169724732.18371.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <WaBuh.15096$pQ3.10501@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <xwsldwre3j.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <HYPuh.15976$yx6.6882@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <md64ashx3o.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1mahvxskejxe1$.tx7bjdqyo2oj$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <2tfy9vgph3.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1g7m33bys8v4p.6p9cpsh3k031$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <s1mz41g7d3.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <14hm72xd3b0bq$.axktv523vay8$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4zwt33xm4b.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1j7neot6h1udi$.14vp2aos6z9l8.dlg@40tude.net>
 <ubqkd8yk3.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <AuednXvMpOTR8l_YnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@megapath.net>
 <u7iv18hm3.fsf_-_@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <1pzx3y7d2pide.y744copm0ejb$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <ulkjgpgt4.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net> <w9hzsx8zcv0t.g21eo7q6ssau.dlg@40tude.net>
From: Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
Organization: The Transcend
Message-ID: <uhcu4p4i7.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, 02 Feb 2007 22:40:51 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.66.252.228
X-Trace: edtnps89 1170456051 208.66.252.228 (Fri, 02 Feb 2007 15:40:51 MST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 15:40:51 MST
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8848
Date: 2007-02-02T22:40:51+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:15:05 GMT, Ray Blaak wrote:
> > GC does not affect visibility or scoping.
> 
> But scoping does affect GC. If scope of each object is known, then there is
> nothing to collect.

If one is using explicit pointers at all, even within a single scope there is
still manual work to free them, unless you want to force the use of some sort
of smart pointer controlled types (which I find tedious compared to using
native pointers).

GC alleviates this work even within a single scope.

> It is the programmer who expresses "in use" in language terms. It could be
> scoped names or a bunch of controlled pointers distributed across the
> program. There must be very strong reasons for choosing the latter.

I am happy to relax the criteria to be just "practical". With GC, one no
longer needs to have such a strong concern precisely because the consequences
are not dire.

> (I don't think that gaining popularity for a programming language is a good
> reason for spaghetti programming. (:-))

I agree :-). I just strongly disagree that the use of shared objects in
conjunction with GC is spaghetti programming.

-- 
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.