Subj : Re: OO compilers and efficiency
To   : comp.programming
From : Tim Rentsch
Date : Thu Jul 21 2005 01:31 am

Chris Dollin <kers@hpl.hp.com> writes:

> Jon Harrop wrote:
> 
> > Chris Dollin wrote:
> >> I believe that if you don't have GC [1], you don't have OO.
> > 
> > Why do you think this?
> 
> Because you have, in general, to worry about when an object 
> is no longer referenced - to do work properly relagated to
> the implementation/language design.
> 
> Didn't Bertrand Meyer articulate this in _Object-Oriented
> Software Construction_? I'll try and remember to check my
> copy. Without GC, you need a snail trail of some kind through 
> your code to handle deallocation.

Not sure about OOSC, but the principle certainly was stated
in "Design Principles behind Smalltalk" (approximate title)
in the August 1981 Byte.

.