From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: GNAT & GCC performace (bad news)
Date: 1999/12/03
Date: 1999-12-03T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1999Dec3.103807.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 38473D90.68D8F47@acenet.com.au
In article <38473D90.68D8F47@acenet.com.au>, Geoff Bull <gbull@acenet.com.au> writes:
> Gnat is a true compiler. It does not translate to-C(++).
The second statement does not prove the first.
From what I have read in this newsgroup, it emits assembly language
which then must be fed through an assembler on the machine.
To me this does not make Gnat any more (or any less) of a "true"
compiler than the Averstar product(?) that _does_ emit C (and
like Gnat got validated).
Larry Kilgallen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-12-03 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-02 0:00 GNAT & GCC performace (bad news) Harald Schmidt
1999-12-02 0:00 ` nabbasi
1999-12-02 0:00 ` James E. Hopper
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-12-04 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-04 0:00 ` Harald Schmidt
1999-12-02 0:00 ` David Starner
1999-12-02 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-12-02 0:00 ` Dmitriy Anisimkov
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Geoff Bull
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Geoff Bull
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
1999-12-06 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-06 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-12-06 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-12-07 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-07 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Ada2001
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Wes Groleau
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1999-12-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-17 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1999-12-07 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-03 0:00 ` Mats Weber
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox