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.
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.