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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,42b96374c851ce5a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Gautier <Gautier.deMontmollin@Maths.UniNe.CH>
Subject: Re: Ada for numerics computation (i.e. forget Fortran ?)
Date: 1999/04/23
Message-ID: <37209E8F.4D4D3989@Maths.UniNe.CH>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 470033371
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <372083A1.45A5EB97@t-online.de>
To: "Hans N. Beck" <HNBeck@t-online.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-04-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> does anyone has experiences with Ada and numerical
> applications ?

Yes, me ;-)

> Does Ada fit for this ?

Yes.

> It's not only a question of types
> available, but also
> of efficiency (speed) of the compilers. Yeeeees I know, in
> the most cases Fortran
> is used, but perhaps anyone walks on new fields ?

* Speed: same between DEC Fortran & DEC Ada, Lahey Fortran and GNAT/DOS
for simple things. (pragma suppress_all -> =Fortran; else -> slower for debugging).
For big programs Ada is faster with a smart usage
of cross-package inlining (available with GNAT) and subtyping.

* Coding time, debugging time, human energy: you _can_ forget Fortran!

There are plenty of numerics resources there:
  http://amok.ast.univie.ac.at/~stift/stift_home.html
For finite elements, sparse matrices, etc. contact me for some sources.

-- 
Gautier

--------
http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/