Why has Ada no garbage collector?
the answer is more complicated: Ada does not require a garbage collector, because of real-time constraints and such. however, the language have been cleverly designed so as to allow the implementation of a garbage collector.
although, many (almost all) compilers do not include a garbage collector, there are some notable implementation:
- a patch for GNAT
- Ada compilers targeting the Java Virtual Machine (i don't know if those projects are still supported). It used the garbage collector of the JVM.
there are plenty other sources about garbage collection in Ada around the web. this subject has been discussed at length, mainly because of the fierce competition with Java in the mid '90s (have a look at this page: "Ada 95 is what the Java language should have been"), when Java was "The Next Big Thing" before Microsoft drew C#.
Because Ada was designed for use in defense systems which control weapons in realtime, and garbage collection interferes with the timing of your application. This is dangerous which is why, for many years, Java came with a warning that it was not to be used for healthcare and military control systems.
I believe that the reason there is no longer such a disclaimer with Java is because the underlying hardware has become much faster as well as the fact that Java has better GC algorithms and better control over GC.
Remember that Ada was developed in the 1970's and 1980's at a time when computers were far less powerful than they are today, and in control applications timing issues were paramount.
Ada was designed with military applications in mind. One of the big priorities in its design was determinism. i.e. one wanted an Ada program to consistently perform exactly the same way every time, in any environment, under all operating systems... that kinda thing.
A garbage collector turns one application into two, working against one another. Java programs develop hiccups at random intervals when the GC decides to go to work, and if it's too slow about it there's a chance that an application will run out of heap sometimes and not others.
Simplified: A garbage collector introduces some variability into a program that the designers didn't want. You make a mess - you clean it up! Same code, same behavior every time.
Not that Ada became a raging worldwide success, mind you.
First off, there is nothing in the language really that prohibits garbage collection.
Secondly some implementations do perform garbage collection. In particular, all the implementations that target the JVM garbage collect.
Thirdly, there is a way to get some amount of garbage collection with all compilers. You see, when an access type goes out of scope, if you specifially told the language to set aside a certian amount of space for storage of its objects, then that space will be destroyed at that point. I've used this in the past to get some modicum of garbage collection. The declaration voodo you use is:
type Foo is access Blah;
for Foo'storage_size use 100_000_000; --// 100K
If you do this, then all (100K of) memory allocated to Blah objects pointed to by Foo pointers will be cleaned up when the Foo type goes out of scope. Since Ada allows you to nest subroutines inside of other subroutines, this is particularly powerful.
To see more about what storage_size and storage pools can do for you, see LRM 13.11
Fourthly, well-written Ada programs don't tend to rely on dynamic memory allocation nearly as much as C programs do. C had a number of design holes that practicioners learned to use pointers to paint over. A lot of those idioms aren't nessecary in Ada.