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
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GC in Ada
References: <1169636785.504223.139630@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
 <SJudnfsXuZsDLyrYnZ2dnUVZ_t6qnZ2d@comcast.com>
 <45b8361a_5@news.bluewin.ch> <m7ejpj5u9t.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <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$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <bpveifcmum.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <eqc456$fp5$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <45c99c24$1@news.post.ch>
 <eqccdc$k89$1@cernne03.cern.ch>
From: Markus E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Organization: N/A
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:19:23 +0100
Message-ID: <wahctyxir8.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+CRHVJ7L6hsp//7Mv+2LIWjD9jI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.241.241
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1170850456 88.72.241.241 (7 Feb 2007 13:14:16 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news1.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:9107
Date: 2007-02-07T13:19:23+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Maciej Sobczak <no.spam@no.spam.com> writes:

> Martin Krischik wrote:
>
>>> What I'm against is a GC "paradigm" that prevents me from having
>>> deterministic "good bye" hooks for scoped lifetime. The problem is
>>> that most GC-oriented languages I'm aware of do have this "issue".
>> But isn't that exactly what "Unchecked_Deallocation" and "pragma
>> Controlled" is all about? Has Ada - by your rationale - not got GC
>> right?
>
> By my rationale Ada and C++ got it perfectly right
> ([Limited_]Controlled mess aside).
>
> The only difference between them in this regard is that Ada explicitly
> allows GC on the low level without requiring it (so that
> implementations can ignore the whole idea) and that C++ is
> traditionally silent about the concept altogether (so that
> implementations can provide it). ;-)
>
> (Note that GC will likely be formalized in the upcoming C++ standard.)
>
> My criticism is targeted at those languages which bring GC to the top
> level obstructing the visible part of the object model.

You mean like Smalltalk -- a language which carries the label OO
wrongly, because it's GC obstructs the object model.

Hm.

Actually I think, real OO (as opposed to tagged types) need GC and
unbounded life time of objects. That's indeed all OO is about.

Regards -- Markus