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: 103376,4b12a5cee4778f63 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Dmitriy Anisimkov Subject: Re: GNAT & GCC performace (bad news) Date: 1999/12/02 Message-ID: <3846FBEC.3644984F@iforex.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 555972793 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Accept-Language: en,ru Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: Abuse Role , We Care X-Trace: newshog.newsread.com 944175803 209.123.73.254 (Thu, 02 Dec 1999 18:03:23 EST) Organization: Intercom Online (intercom.com) MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 18:03:23 EST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-12-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Harald Schmidt wrote: > gnat and gnu c. My experience while compiling and running > the dhrystone benchmark was that the C version of the > Dhrystone was nearly twice as fast as the Ada version, and > this sounds really bad. Has anyone any idea why this > is so and how to solve this problem. What I was expecting, > because gnat isn't a compiler env. but a to-C(++) translator, > the performance decrease about ten to twenty percent but > not 50 percent. > You have to Suppress all runtime checks in GNAT by the -gnatp switch to gcc or gnatmake for correct comparision.