3 ms·

> You're correct. No, s/he's not. The original claim was: > It is in general undecidable whether an object is UNREACHABLE. [Emphasis added] Being unreachab

by lisper 3y ago

> You're correct. No, s/he's not. The original claim was: > It is in general undecidable whether an object is UNREACHABLE. [Emphasis added] Being unreachable is not the same thing as being "no longer used by the code". The latter is indeed undecidable, but the former is not.