Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!olivea!apple!ksand
From: ksand@Apple.COM (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Smart pointers and stupid people (was: garbage collection...)
Message-ID: <49285@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 91 20:40:04 GMT
References: <3779@lupine.NCD.COM> <70606@microsoft.UUCP> <3945@lupine.NCD.COM>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 31

In article <3945@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:

>Jim Adcock (and others) have shown an inability to grasp the meaning of
>a simple sentence written in plain english.
>
>Read my lips:  C++ objects do not move.

...as long as we talk about C++ compilers working under UNIX. Note
that there are other operating systems that have a wide range of 
ideas how memory is handled. Speaking from my own point of view, in
the case of MacOS we have relocatable blocks called handles, and 
in our C++ AT&T port we do have a object type called HandleObject,
which is an object which indeed moves in memory (in order to compact
the heap).

Anyway, I have not checked ARM and the ANSI specs/drafts, but I would 
be highly surprised if the standards lock the underlying object
memory handling scheme to a plain non-moveable version only. Also,
is it in the interest of a language to specify the implementation?

Regards,
Kent Sandvik




-- 
Kent Sandvik, Apple Computer Inc, Developer Technical Support
NET:ksand@apple.com, AppleLink: KSAND  DISCLAIMER: Private mumbo-jumbo
Zippy++ says: "C++ is a write-only language, I can write programs in C++
but I can't read any of them".