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-Thread: 108717,a7c8692cac750b5e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid115aec,gidf43e6,gid108717,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: CTips <ctips@bestweb.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng,comp.programming
Subject: Re: 10 rules for benchmarking (was Re: Teaching new tricks to an
 old dog (C++ -->Ada))
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:29:37 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <11369p5jrcc6835@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>
 <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org>
 <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk>
 <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02>
 <d0dkq6$781$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
 <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <112rs0bdr2aftdf@corp.supernews.com>
 <1inxxr988rxgg$.1w9dedak41k89.dlg@40tude.net>
 <112s1r0rf0o8nca@corp.supernews.com> <d0l2gq$egt$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 <112sonip5v4dca6@corp.supernews.com>
 <E1vXd.352556$w62.20389@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <112t3de6fu04f38@corp.supernews.com>
 <1110396477.596174.285520@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
 <112vb2t8eonuhed@corp.supernews.com>
 <1110422108.925127.54110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
 <11329cb96h2p19f@corp.supernews.com> <c92s0d.vgk.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <113394jjvppao64@corp.supernews.com> <uk6oeaua9.fsf@obry.org>
 <1133s3qnmqmbjfb@corp.supernews.com>
 <4232a9f7$0$26552$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
In-Reply-To: <4232a9f7$0$26552$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
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:9240 comp.realtime:1372
 comp.software-eng:4932 comp.programming:17873
Date: 2005-03-12T12:29:37-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> CTips wrote:
> 
>> Like I said, if one knows what one is doing (which he does) then one 
>> can disregard the rules. If one does not know what one is doing (which 
>> you don't) then one should follow the rules.
> 
<snip: summary: performance isn't everything, nor is it required>

I agree.

I was trying to point out that Ada's extra checking can come with 
performance costs. It may not be important in many applications, but 
when performance is at all a requirement, then Ada may be an 
inapprorpiate choice of languages.

BTW: I was looking around - I couldn't find an Ada equivalent to the ISO 
C clock() routine. What is it? I can't believe that the Ada standard 
community would have been *that* oblivious to performance that they 
wouldn't put a performance measuring routine in the core specification.

Oh, and just to illustrate another point about Ada, try running the Ada 
program equivalent to the following program:

#define N 30000
#define N2 60000

void
setup_array(
	int *	x[N2],
	int	p[N+1],
	int	q[N+1]
	)
{
   int i;
   for( i = 0; i < N; i++ ) {
     x[i] = &p[i];
     x[i+N] = &q[i];

   }
}

void
do_array(
  	int * x[N2]
	)
{
   int i;
   int *p;
   for( i = 0; i < N2; i++ ) {
     p = x[i];
     p[1] = i;
    }
}

int
main(void)
{
   int p[N+1];
   int q[N+1];
   int * x[N2];
   int i;

   setup_array(x, p, q);
   for( i = 0; i < 10000; i++ ) {
     do_array(x);
   }
   return 0;
}