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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7402728c011ea87a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Efficient io of arbitrary binary data.
Date: 1996/09/16
Message-ID: <1996Sep16.084759.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 180911653
x-nntp-posting-host: eisner.decus.org
references: <3239B3B2.1AE4@cray.com> <1996Sep14.153426.1@eisner>
 <BRH.96Sep16002020@poplar111.cray.com>
x-nntp-posting-user: KILGALLEN
x-trace: 842878090/18598
organization: LJK Software
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-09-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <BRH.96Sep16002020@poplar111.cray.com>, brh@poplar111.cray.com (Brian Hanson) writes:

> Actually, folks in our shop are big on optimizing c, c++ and fortran compilers.
> My target platforms - sgi (our new parent) and sun (our workstation of 
> choice prior to acquiring a parent) - use gnat.
> 
> is it really likely that 
> 
> 
> 	case compare_keys(current_string(buf1), current_string(buf2)) is
> 	  when smaller, the_same =>
> 		store_string(buf3, current_string(buf1));
> 		advance_string(buf1);
> 	  when larger =>
> 		store_string(buf3, current_string(buf2));
> 		advance_string(buf2);
> 	end case;
> 
> would really optimize the copying of the string slices away.

As has been pointed out on this list, one of the advantages of using
GNAT is that if you feel it is inadequate in some regard, you can
extend it.  Optimization seems one of the best areas for extension,
since you are not doing something which will conflict with whatever
the next standard might be.

Larry Kilgallen