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: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:19 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <113cfqv380t2dc7@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>
   <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>
 <11369p5jrcc6835@corp.supernews.com> <d0vd02$1mc$1@hercules.btinternet.com>
 <1136h6a12qv8282@corp.supernews.com> <RfCdnWUVR9j2kavfRVn-ow@megapath.net>
In-Reply-To: <RfCdnWUVR9j2kavfRVn-ow@megapath.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:9422 comp.realtime:1502
 comp.software-eng:5071 comp.programming:17956
Date: 2005-03-14T20:50:19-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Randy Brukardt wrote:

> CTips wrote:
> 
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> As previously mentioned, it will be added to Ada 2005 (expected approval
> this summer).
> 
> I believe that the reason that it didn't exist in previous versions of Ada
> was that directly targeting bare machines was an intended implementation of
> Ada. That is, the Ada RTS would provide the entire RTOS for the target,
> including tasking, exceptions, and so on. In that case, providing a CPU time
> function would have added overhead that may not have had any value to the
> user (you would have to keep track of it on every task switch whether it was
> used or not).

How about the ANSI C solution: clock() must be defined, but can always 
return -1 if the service is not available. Isn't that a better way?