Robert I. Eachus wrote: > At 04:35 PM 10/1/98 -0400, Michael Feldman wrote: > >Just for completeness - Ada has no (required) garbage collection. > > Just for completeness, Ada does have required garbage collection, but > only for a few specific types. See A.4.5(88) for Ada.Strings.Unbounded. > (It is not possible to implement this type and the corresponding wide type > without garbage collection, although it can be done with reference > counting, and without compaction.) Well, GNAT does it the natural way, using Ada.Finalization.Controlled, without garbage collection (or are we disagreeing on the definition of GC ?). Are you saying their implementation is broken ?