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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,539c04254abf1b37 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-28 10:33:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: andreatta@mail.chem.sc.edu (Dan Andreatta) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: compiler benchmark comparisons (was: naval systems) Date: 28 Feb 2002 10:33:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <338040f8.0202281033.6c6f588d@posting.google.com> References: <3C74E519.3F5349C4@baesystems.com> <3C7D37FD.F67F7067@despammed.com> <17247c3d.0202271553.68aaf78d@posting.google.com> <338040f8.0202271819.373f733a@posting.google.com> <4519e058.0202280631.fffd525@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.252.151.109 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1014921182 14916 127.0.0.1 (28 Feb 2002 18:33:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 2002 18:33:02 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20591 Date: 2002-02-28T18:33:02+00:00 List-Id: Those are the times to compile the source code. The execution times were much closer (0.2 sec gcc vs. 0.5 sec gnat, dumping the output). If you meant the compiler I/O, the sizes of the source files were around 45kb for C and 82 kb for Ada. So if the I/O is the limiting factor, I would expect gnat to be slower by only a factor of 2, not 10, provided that the parsing routines have similar efficiency. The bottleneck is not in the checkings, since the use of -gnatp does not modify the times. I don't pretend this is a good test, after all I did it in 10 minutes yesterday night. Dan