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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,90c3c79963d78580
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-05-11 08:28:29 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.sj.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!coop.net!newsfeed1.global.lmco.com!svlnews.lmms.lmco.com!news1.lmtas.lmco.com!not-for-mail
From: Gary Scott <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Numerical Computation and Ada95
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:33:46 -0500
Organization: LM Aeronautics
Message-ID: <3AFBF84A.97A539F1@lmtas.lmco.com>
References: <9dc4sh$ru5$1@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr>
 <3AF9E3BF.D6D73BEA@linuxchip.demon.co.uk> <9dd9tb$1o56$1@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr>
 <3AFAF555.F534480E@lmtas.lmco.com> <3RmTMK7qwsTH@eisner.encompasserve.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: CAA261517.lmtas.lmco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; LMTAS}  (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
Xref: archiver1.sj.google.com comp.lang.ada:7397
Date: 2001-05-11T09:33:46-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hi,

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 
> In article <3AFAF555.F534480E@lmtas.lmco.com>, Gary Scott <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com> writes:
> > As an F95 programmer, I don't think that for most applications the
> > performance difference between these languages will be significantly
> > different if you limit the code to easily optimizable constructs.
> > However, it is my impression that Fortran compiler vendors have
> > traditionally been much more obsessed with performance issues and I'm
> > certain that the standards committee designs nearly everything
> > obsessively with performance issues in mind (i.e. not "expressivity" of
> > language constructs).
> 
> Whereas I was under the impression that the Fortran standard had recently
> added "pointer" constructs, the bane of optimization everywhere.

Recent as in "pointers" were added a decade or so ago.  I would point
out also, that nearly every compiler supports "Cray" or "integer"
pointers as well which would likely inhibit optimization, however with
the addition of a standard pointer, the need for raw address pointers is
very limited (mixed language mostly, my only use is to use a win32 API
call to allocate a shared memory work space (file mapping) and
subsequently assign the starting address to a procedure variable).  The
next standard will (I think) add a new pointer specific to interfacing
with the C language.