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: 5b1e799cdb,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-Attributes: gid5b1e799cdb,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.scheme,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.c++,comp.programming
Subject: Re: Alternatives to C: ObjectPascal, Eiffel, Ada or Modula-3?
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <28cd8a21-b962-4076-a9c0-7b5d07056dd2@r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <2009a75f-63e7-485e-9d9f-955e456578ed@v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
	<h4qvgd$j4t$1@aioe.org>
 <0bdf3c02-0565-40e2-95cc-c7f5eb546313@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
	<7xmy6mzy0q.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
 <c23ffb32-27f2-4190-a10c-e2ce5cb9359b@p10g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
	<4a714308$0$30229$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <48679a94-4ce4-422e-8656-56bb682b08c0@d15g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1248942865 13348 127.0.0.1 (30 Jul 2009 08:34:25
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:34:25 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=153.98.68.197;
	posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6)
	Gecko/2009012111 Red Hat/3.0.6-1.el5 Firefox/3.0.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.scheme:6197 comp.lang.ada:7440
 comp.lang.functional:2548 comp.lang.c++:48619 comp.programming:12152
Date: 2009-07-30T01:34:25-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

fft1976 wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>> A second reason why Ada has dropped at the Shootout is
>> that the systems they use have older interim (from the Ada
>> point of view) GCCs that are known to be broken.
>> This makes some perfectly normal Ada programs fail there.
>> As the code is available and did not fail when it was
>> first ranked, and does not fail when used with an apt
>> compiler like GCC 4.3.x, the Shootout is just showing its
>> information potential ;-)
>
> How would this explain Ada's slow speed? I don't understand you.

Remember that the Shootout does not compare languages; it compares
compilers (i.e. particular implementations of some languages) combined
with programs (i.e. particular implementations of some algorithms).
So, upgrading the compiler is likely to improve the performance of Ada
programs; similarly, spending time to hand-optimize the programs is
also likely to improve their performance.

--
Ludovic Brenta.