Timeline for Why don't compilers automatically insert deallocations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://cs.stackexchange.com/ with https://cs.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Feb 3, 2017 at 22:59 | comment | added | Travis Wilson | I'm just suggesting that the language was designed for cases where the programmer does know FOO isn't useful anymore. I agree, clearly, this is not usually true, and that's why we need to have static analysis and/or garbage collection. Which, hooray, we do. But the OP's question is, when are those things not as valuable as hand-coded deallocs? | |
| Jan 14, 2017 at 13:00 | comment | added | Raphael | "'At this point in the program, memory reference FOO isn't useful anymore' is information only known in the mind of the programmer" -- that's clearly wrong. a) For many FOO, it's trivial to figure this out, e.g. local variables with value semantics. b) You suggest that the programmer knows this, always, which is clearly an overly optimistic assumption; if it were true, we'd have no sever bugs due to bad memory handling is security-critical software. Which, alas, we do. | |
| Jan 13, 2017 at 23:13 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 14, 2017 at 1:57 | |||||
| Jan 13, 2017 at 23:06 | history | answered | Travis Wilson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |