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 X-Google-Thread: 103376,2cdc6c2ee911fe77 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Vincent DIEMUNSCH Subject: Re: Ada vs. C++ Date: 2000/02/14 Message-ID: <38A7EE61.353F9ECF@edf.fr>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 585699248 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit References: <38A37C97.9E181025@interact.net.au> X-Accept-Language: fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Complaints-To: newsadm@news.edf.fr X-Trace: clnews.edf.fr 950529633 17735 144.165.69.25 (14 Feb 2000 12:00:33 GMT) Organization: Direction des Etudes et Recherches EDF Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Feb 2000 12:00:33 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-02-14T12:00:33+00:00 List-Id: G a �crit : > Has anyone done any measurements on the different speeds and > memory requirements of comparable applications written in C++ > and Ada95. I am learning both languages. > > -- > Thankyou. > -- > G. Such a comparison is not obvious, it relies too much of the compiler's optimization. But Tartan who makes both C and Ada compilers for Digital Signal Processors seems to like Ada much better than C to implement the same algorithms. see : http://www.adahome.com/Ammo/Stories/Tartan-Realtime.html See is due to the fact that Ada gives a more abstract and precise definition of what as to be done, compared to C who tend to stay at a lower level. Therefore although it is easier to write a simple C compiler, when it turns to optimization, Ada is much better. Borland who made both C and Pascal compilers said the same. Pascal can be seen as an "ancestor" of Ada, because it's syntax is quite close.