From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: CTips Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:09:39 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <112u7undo5h2q0a@corp.supernews.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02> <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <112rs0bdr2aftdf@corp.supernews.com> <1inxxr988rxgg$.1w9dedak41k89.dlg@40tude.net> <112s1r0rf0o8nca@corp.supernews.com> <112sonip5v4dca6@corp.supernews.com> <112t3de6fu04f38@corp.supernews.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8945 comp.realtime:1136 comp.software-eng:4694 Date: 2005-03-09T11:09:39-05:00 List-Id: Pascal Obry wrote: > CTips writes: > > >>Actually, I can verify that: if I look at the computer shootout >>http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/great/, I find that gcc C beats gnat Ada >>pretty much across the board; actually, Ada's performance sucks pretty much >>across the board. One of gcc C or Intel C is generally among the top few >>programs, while with a couple of exceptions, Gnat Ada is around the >>middle. In matrix multiply it gets beaten by LISP, Java, and Python!!! (How >>can you get beaten by Python? The mind boggles!) > > > Let me answer. Because you are giving credits to something that you don't > even understand! This makes me regards your other posts differently now. > > Did you really expect GNAT/Ada to be slower than Python, Java and LISP ??? Did > you really or did you use this argument because you had nothing better! > > It is always tricky to compare speed of language implementations, but when the > guys doing it are incompetent (or trying to play with the result?), what > should we think! > > $ /opt/intel_cc_80/bin/icc -O3 -ipo -static matrix.c -o matrix.icc_run > > $ /usr/bin/gcc -pipe -Wall -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops matrix.c -o matrix.gcc_run > > $ /usr/bin/gnatmake -f -u matrix.adb > > Why did they used all these fancy optimizations for intel C and GCC/C and > not for GNAT/Ada!!!!! Cause the people who submitted it cared enough (in C) to actually submit a decent of options. The maintainer of the site has little to do with options selection. > Pascal. > Nope, I didn't look at the compile parameters. My bad. I just assumed that whoever submitted the examples would have tried to make themselves look as good as possible. That, of course, is a result of my C mindset - I can't think of anyone submitting code to a performance site without first making sure I was getting as much performance out of it. It appears that the Ada mindset is different. Or is it because GNAT is known to produce buggy code at higher optimization levels? BTW: any chance someone might be tempted into actually submitting a run with appropriate optimization parameters?