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: 103376,81cf52699486abe7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Alfred Hilscher <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de>
Subject: Code size of Ada ? was Re: Ada95 Strengths/Weaknesses.
Date: 1999/09/28
Message-ID: <37F0D03C.DE4807D4@icn.siemens.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 530308757
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <37EED7B8.245C0054@yukyonline.co.yuky>
 <7smp30$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <7sp8m9$a6e$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Siemens AG
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-09-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert Dewar wrote:
> > * C & C++ compilers will usually produce smaller and faster
> > code, albeit usually less than an order of magnitude.
> 
> Well an order of magnitude would be a catastrophe, but in fact
> the statement is just false. If your Ada compiler produces
> junk code, get another one. In the case of GNAT, the compiler
> uses exactly the same code generator as the GNU C compiler or
> the G++ compiler, so for comparable source code, you get
> identical object code.
> 
> Robert Dewar
> 
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.


Ok, so can you please tell me what I'm doing wrong ? All my test (from a
simple "Hello world" upto a TCP/IP program with tasks) generate much
bigger exe-files (WIN/NT or OS/2) than the C, Pascal or Modula-2
compilers I've tried. I used the default settings. What switches are
needed to generate the smallest possible code ?

Regards,
Alfred