Re: ada and robots

["Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <nospam@gsg.eds.com>]

Ken Garlington wrote:
> 
> > Again, let's see the C.  Real code.  Ask your colleague to show us some
> > C code (for a device driver, or part of one, for example), and let's see
> > whether Ada is up to the job.  I will freely admit that Ada has many
> > flaws, but the above series of incorrect claims about Ada doesn't help.
> 
> Let's do the opposite: Write an assembly program that can't be coded in
> C (or other high-order language), and use that to show that we must all
> code in assembly. How about: Do a ones-and-zeros ripple test
> of all of memory, including the stack and heap.

As a sidelight, I was once tasked with improving the performance of a
service routine written in Intel assembly language; my replacement
version was in Ada and was dramatically faster. This doesn't prove that
Ada is more efficient than assembly language, but rather that there is a
lot more to efficiency than just the choice of language.

> --
> LMTAS - The Fighter Enterprise - "Our Brand Means Quality"
> Who uses Ada? See http://www.lmasc.lmco.com/f22
> For job listings, other info: http://www.lmtas.com or
> http://www.lmco.com

-- 

                        Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
                        Senior Software SE

The values in from and reply-to are for the benefit of spammers:
reply to domain eds.com, user msustys1.smetz or to domain gsg.eds.com,
user smetz.