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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e6c9800e35ccfeee
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei@online.no>
Subject: Re: GNAT: Performance of String functions
Date: 1997/07/22
Message-ID: <33D4F30F.5299@online.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 258165367
References: <dewar.869405750@merv> <EDnEIw.6ME.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
 <5r1l6e$e0h$1@ratatosk.uio.no> <1997Jul22.071638.1@eisner>
Organization: Jensen programvareutvikling
Reply-To: tarjei@online.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-07-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


>> 
>>Tarjei T. Jensen writes:
>> 
>> I suspect bounded strings will perform badly against a counted string
>> implementation because assignment of strings involves copying the entire array
>> whether it contains valid data or not. This makes Ada less than wonderful in
>> applications that involve a lot of bounded string assignments.
>
>Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> No, it might affect particular _implementations_ of Ada, but I have
> read no indications that counted strings would not be a valid way of
> implementing bounded strings.  If the Varying String datatype made
> quite public by DEC Pascal were used in some Ada implementation to
> implement bounded strings (and for all I know, it or something quite
> close to it is) execution should be quite efficient for strings
> below a certain size (ultimately one gets into page faults, cache
> misses and other stack-vs-heap issues).
> 
> Larry Kilgallen

That would mean that the implementation supply a default maximum size.
If the implementation should be more effective than the usual bounded
string implementation the compiler whould have to know what the real
length of a string is for assignments. Otherwise the code generated
spends a lot of time copying junk data.

A "smart" compiler is paramount since we cannot do anything about the
assignment operator in Ada. We can write a custom procedure or function
to handle assignment, but it is not the same as ":=".

I would be delighted if someone could show that a smart compiler is not
neccessary to optimize counted or bounded string operations.


Greetings,


-- 
// Tarjei T. Jensen 
//    tarjei@online.no || voice +47 51 62 85 58
//   Support you local rescue centre: GET LOST!