Re: Ada GC

jsa@organon.com (Jon S Anthony)
14 Feb 1996 21:32:38 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[21 earlier articles]
Re: Ada GC boehm@parc.xerox.com (1996-02-13)
Re: Ada GC yanowitz@mcet.edu (1996-02-13)
Re: Ada GC kelvin@cs.iastate.edu (1996-02-13)
Re: Ada GC stt@copperfield.camb.inmet.com (1996-02-13)
Re: Ada GC rfg@monkeys.com (1996-02-13)
Re: Ada GC boehm@parc.xerox.com (1996-02-14)
Re: Ada GC jsa@organon.com (1996-02-14)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: jsa@organon.com (Jon S Anthony)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.ada
Date: 14 Feb 1996 21:32:38 -0500
Organization: Organon Motives, Inc.
References: <96-01-037@comp.compilers 96-02-091 96-02-136
Keywords: GC, performance



Henry Baker <hbaker@netcom.com> wrote:
>It's no harder to formally specify what it means to 'have GC' than it
>is to specify what it means to be 'real-time'. ...


Kevin Weise <kweise@pluto.colsa.com> wrote:
>I admit I haven't read the specifications and definitions of all new
>languages for the past twenty years. But I have *never* seen a language
>specification that did this, except for certain assemblers that told you
>how many machine cycles each instruction required to execute...


rfg@monkeys.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) writes:
> Check the C++ language standard... library section.
>
> (Certainly of the STL library operations have time complexity requirements
> in the draft standard.)


They are not talking about general time complexity stuff (big-O,
little-o, Theta, etc.) They are talking about actual maximal time
constraints as in something like, "...this operation has time bounds
such that under circumstance ..., it will not exceed 100micro seconds,
under ...." Of course this is related to time complexity, but is not
the same thing.


/Jon
--
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
1 Williston Road, Suite 4
Belmont, MA 02178


617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.