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,bcdac28207102750
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran)
Subject: Re: Ada95 speed
Date: 1999/05/18
Message-ID: <3741aa37.3892645@news.pacbell.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 478783925
References: <374182F2.B10AD449@Maths.UniNe.CH>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net
X-Trace: typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 927050376 206.170.2.89 (Tue,
 18 May 1999 10:59:36 PDT)
Organization: SBC Internet Services
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 10:59:36 PDT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>>Is Ada95 slow in order to be safe?

>With run-time checks, yes; without them, no.
>-gnatp suppresses all.
  On Win95, I see a very modest difference between "-O3" and "-gnatp
-O3" on this Mandelbrot code.