Why has Ada no garbage collector

Implicit garbage collection could have been added in, but it just didn't make the cut. Probably due to not just implementation complications, but also due to people not being able to come to a general consensus fast enough.

A quote from Bjarne Stroustrup himself:

I had hoped that a garbage collector which could be optionally enabled would be part of C++0x, but there were enough technical problems that I have to make do with just a detailed specification of how such a collector integrates with the rest of the language, if provided. As is the case with essentially all C++0x features, an experimental implementation exists.

There is a good discussion of the topic here.

General overview:

C++ is very powerful and allows you to do almost anything. For this reason it doesn't automatically push many things onto you that might impact performance. Garbage collection can be easily implemented with smart pointers (objects that wrap pointers with a reference count, which auto delete themselves when the reference count reaches 0).

C++ was built with competitors in mind that did not have garbage collection. Efficiency was the main concern that C++ had to fend off criticism from in comparison to C and others.

There are 2 types of garbage collection...

Explicit garbage collection:

C++0x will have garbage collection via pointers created with shared_ptr

If you want it you can use it, if you don't want it you aren't forced into using it.

You can currently use boost:shared_ptr as well if you don't want to wait for C++0x.

Implicit garbage collection:

It does not have transparent garbage collection though. It will be a focus point for future C++ specs though.

Why Tr1 doesn't have implicit garbage collection?

There are a lot of things that tr1 of C++0x should have had, Bjarne Stroustrup in previous interviews stated that tr1 didn't have as much as he would have liked.

Eric Lippert wrote a detailed blog post about this subject a while back (additionally comparing it to VBScript). More accurately, he wrote about JScript, which is Microsoft's own implementation of ECMAScript, although very similar to JavaScript. I would imagine that you can assume the vast majority of behaviour would be the same for the JavaScript engine of Internet Explorer. Of course, the implementation will vary from browser to browser, though I suspect you could take a number of the common principles and apply them to other browsers.

Quoted from that page:

JScript uses a nongenerational mark-and-sweep garbage collector. It works like this:

• Every variable which is "in scope" is called a "scavenger". A scavenger may refer to a number, an object, a string, whatever. We maintain a list of scavengers -- variables are moved on to the scav list when they come into scope and off the scav list when they go out of scope.

• Every now and then the garbage collector runs. First it puts a "mark" on every object, variable, string, etc – all the memory tracked by the GC. (JScript uses the VARIANT data structure internally and there are plenty of extra unused bits in that structure, so we just set one of them.)

• Second, it clears the mark on the scavengers and the transitive closure of scavenger references. So if a scavenger object references a nonscavenger object then we clear the bits on the nonscavenger, and on everything that it refers to. (I am using the word "closure" in a different sense than in my earlier post.)

• At this point we know that all the memory still marked is allocated memory which cannot be reached by any path from any in-scope variable. All of those objects are instructed to tear themselves down, which destroys any circular references.

The main purpose of garbage collection is to allow the programmer not to worry about memory management of the objects they create and use, though of course there's no avoiding it sometimes - it is always beneficial to have at least a rough idea of how garbage collection works.

Historical note: an earlier revision of the answer had an incorrect reference to the delete operator. In JavaScript the delete operator removes a property from an object, and is wholly different to delete in C/C++.