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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,23c85e456e18d6b5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: igouy@yahoo.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The Computer Language Shootout Benchmarks Date: 6 May 2006 00:34:06 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1146900846.729170.276400@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1262902.DI8C0e8O9o@linux1.krischik.com> <4457afb1$1_1@news.bluewin.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.6.178.189 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1146900852 9660 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2006 07:34:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 07:34:12 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060308 Firefox/1.5.0.2,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.6.178.189; posting-account=7DGySgwAAADWW5O_600A0X4F7Tvs4mwJ Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4111 Date: 2006-05-06T00:34:06-07:00 List-Id: Craig Carey wrote: > On Thu, 04 May 2006 14:01:24 +1200, Craig Carey wrote to comp.lang.ada: > >On Tue, 02 May 2006 21:14:19 +0200, Gautier wrote: > >>Martin Krischik [wrote] > ... > > "How many times faster or smaller are the Ada 95 GNAT programs than > > the corresponding C gcc programs? > > > > "GNAT x times better > > - gcc x times better" > > > ... > > That gives a narrow to print out backtraces... > . ^ window > > > I considered that I may have made a mistake in my last message, by > not considering that the figures in the table were found in this > way: > > Benchmark timing results for FSF GNAT and GCC C of unknown version, > were T1 and T2. > > Compute F = T1 / T2. > The results displayed is: (F - (1 / F)) When F < 1 the result displayed is -1/F Someone looking at GNAT vs C GCC will see the same numbers as someone looking at C GCC vs GNAT, but in gray with a different sign. > > Here is the page after the undefined data-massaging formula is applied > (the formula is not in the FAQ, meaning that debian programmers don't > frequently inquire about the origin of figures finding every compiler > except one to be not-best): > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/ada.php > > | Program & Logs . .Faster . .Smaller: Memory Use . .Smaller: Code Lines > | binary-trees . . . . -1.8 . . . . . . -1.6 . . . . . . . . -1.2 . . . > > So GNAt is slower than version ?.?.? Gcc and got a -1.8. > > Using the F - 1/F finds that the figure ought be -1.17. > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=binarytrees&lang=gcc > > | binary-trees benchmark | C gcc | binary-trees full data > | binary-trees C gcc program > | N . . . . .Full CPU Time s . . . . Memory Use KB . . . . Code Lines > | 16 . . . . . . . . . . 4.12 . . . . . . . . 4,528 . . . . . . . . 80 > | contributed by Kevin Carson > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=binarytrees&lang=gnat&id=0 > > | binary-trees benchmark | Ada 95 GNAT | binary-trees full data > | binary-trees Ada 95 GNAT program > | N . . . . .Full CPU Time s . . . . Memory Use KB . . . . Code Lines > | 16 . . . . . . . . . . 7.21 . . . . . . . . 7,360 . . . . . . . . 99 > | -- Contributed by Jim Rogers > > Calculations: > Full CPU Time: > 4.12 / 7.21 = 0.57143 ; 0.57143 - (1 / 0.57143) = -1.17856563 > Memory Use: > 4528 / 7360 = 0.61522 ; 0.61522 - (1 / 0.61522) = -1.01021 > Code Lines: > 80 / 99 = 0.80808 ; 0.80808 - (1 / 0.80808) = -0.42942124 > > > The GNAT "pragma Suppress" improves GNAT's timing results by enough to > cause it to be used. > > It is not clear why "gcc" has two names at the alioth website: "C gcc", > and "gcc". Ada is part of Gcc and use of svn can show that. > > Concluding, the competitor to Ada found that its competitor was > boosted by +53%. (1.8/1.17 = 1.53846154). Though almost certainly an > attack on Ada, there was simply no admission of that, just a straight > face presentation of the bare facts... > > > > > Craig Carey > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So most of the numbers are nearly all negative. > > > >Thus it is probable that the creator of the website wishes to present > >himself/herself as observing that GNAT executables > > finish running before they start. > > > >That gives a narrow to print out backtraces... > > > >For a clarification, the "ada.php" webpage shows an image that > >contains images of horizontal bars. > > > >Of them I note: > > > > * none are labelled. However the first word on the webpage is > > "Debian" (rather than, eg., "Linux"). > > > > * Something is labelled in the plot: and that is the horizontal > > axis. It has two labels that are not clarified: > > > > (a) "GNAT better" (on the right) > > (b) "gcc better" (on the left). > > > >So what is the "-" symbol mean, in the text "- gcc times better". > > > >Special reasoning skills are possibly needed to prevent modifying > >scripts so that --sysroot is added to ld linker operations and then > >the GNAT compiler is actually built under the FreeBSD emulator. > >FreeBSD seems to be getting faster, and maybe the buildword is > >less likely to crash too. > > > >Here is the competing Windows "shootout" webpage: > > > > http://dada.perl.it/shootout/ > > > > > > > > > > > >>- 4 native solutions > >>HTH > >>_______________________________________________________________ > >>Gautier -- http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/gdm/index.htm > > > >Craig Carey