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: 103376,71aa8acfc8368f1c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Gautier Subject: Re: BLAS Date: 2000/05/14 Message-ID: <391F18DF.C4699276@maths.unine.ch>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 623370516 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: 14 May 2000 23:21:37 +0100, mac13-32.unine.ch Organization: Maths - Uni =?iso-8859-1?Q?Neuch=E2tel?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-05-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Larry Kilgallen: > Unfortunately a published comparison would likely only be made > on the basis of performance or features. I heard the author > Mark Minasi speak last October about problems in the software > industry, and he pointed out that magazine comparisons with a > two-dimensional array showing features of competing products > was exactly what drove vendors to emphasize new features rather > than quality. There is a famous quote from Bill Gates saying > that new features are the only thing that sells new versions > of software (not better quality). Well - the market in question is not one where our friend Bill is very present. And there: performance is essential! > I realize that performance is one aspect of "quality", > but I think the more important one is "correctness". Do I understand well ?! You seem to oppose quality and correctness. As a DEC Ada user, you have the example of a product where quality and correctness meet rather well, don't they ?... > I don't like the idea of Ada people being sucked into the > mainstream error of considering only that which is most > easily measured rather than that which is most important. You seem to fear a comparison on performance. But some Ada compilers _do_ produce performant code! Those which don't should be improved! Ada is known to have nice, unique features around typing and security, but people often say: "ok, nice, but it means slower code doesn't it ?" If you can say: "The wonderful Ada has such, such and such marvelous features _AND_ this compiler and that one produce code so fast that you need a bigger fan for the CPU", where is the problem ?... _____________________________________________ Gautier -- http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/