Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!clyde.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!crackers!m2c!umvlsi!dime!dime.cs.umass.edu!moss From: moss@cs.umass.edu (Eliot Moss) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Overhead in object tables Message-ID: Date: 14 Feb 91 14:09:43 GMT References: <11797@darkstar.ucsc.edu| <1913@media01.UUCP> <1991Feb6.111013.8412@tukki.jyu.fi> <70647@microsoft.UUCP> Sender: news@dime.cs.umass.edu Reply-To: moss@cs.umass.edu Organization: Dept of Comp and Info Sci, Univ of Mass (Amherst) Lines: 20 In-reply-to: jimad@microsoft.UUCP's message of 13 Feb 91 17:31:09 GMT Concerning some of the comments about enumerating instances of classes in C++, what I meant was it is possible to design a C++ implementation that would do this. I was not thinking of some add-on to existing implementations, or that the code would (necessarily) be written in C++. I think it's a real shame that better memory management and garbage collection were not designed in to C++ from the start. I will tend to trust programs written in Modula-3 (for example) rather more than ones written in C++ because of the insidious nature of memory management bugs (storage leaks, dangling references, etc.) and the fact that C++ does little to help the programmer attain correct memory management (a little better than C, but that's not saying much). Well enough soapbox speechifying .... -- J. Eliot B. Moss, Assistant Professor Department of Computer and Information Science Lederle Graduate Research Center University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 (413) 545-4206, 545-1249 (fax); Moss@cs.umass.edu