|Possible to write compiler to Java VM? (I volunteer to summarize) email@example.com (Peter Seibel) (1996-01-17)|
|Re: Possible to write compiler to Java VM? firstname.lastname@example.org (Thomas Dunbar) (1996-01-27)|
|Re: Possible to write compiler to Java VM? email@example.com (1996-01-29)|
|Java-Ada95 comparisons firstname.lastname@example.org (Saileshwar Krishnamurthy) (1996-01-29)|
|Re: Java-Ada95 comparisons email@example.com.HAC.COM (1996-01-30)|
|Re: Java-Ada95 comparisons firstname.lastname@example.org (1996-02-02)|
|Re: Java-Ada95 comparisons email@example.com (1996-02-09)|
|From:||Saileshwar Krishnamurthy <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||29 Jan 1996 17:42:24 -0500|
|References:||96-01-037 96-01-085 96-01-100|
|Keywords:||Ada, GC, translator|
Samuel Tardieu <email@example.com> wrote:
> You may have a look on:
> http://lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada/Resources/Ada_Java.html There is
> a table comparing Java, Ada and C++.
Henry Baker <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I looked at this web page, and it said that Ada-95 is the language
> that Java 'should have been'. ...
> However, the single most important reason why Java is a _much_
> better language than Ada-95 is the fact that Java does garbage
> collection and Ada does not. Twice now, the Ada language people
> have gone AWOL (absent without leave -- i.e., deserted) on the GC
> issue, and for no technically supportable reasons. Their
I don't get this. I just looked at that page and under GC it says Yes,
No, Yes in order for Java, C++ and Ada95.
It also says:
"Another interesting (or shall I say "striking") aspect is that the
Java virtual machine includes garbage collection. This means that we
will soon have access to the first Ada system that collects garbage,
should any be left around... In other words, this is the end of the
mythical, or was it mystical, garbage collector allowed but not
required by the Ada reference manual."
Does this "mythical" GC-er exist in Ada95 as well ?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.