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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e7e6e919cef50811 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-14 05:00:07 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr17.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C909F9D.6D624B86@flash.net> From: Gary Scott Reply-To: scottg@flash.net Organization: Home X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en]C-DIAL (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: comparing gnat/Ada95 and g77 References: <3C908617.C96A6579@Physik.Uni-Magdeburg.DE> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.48.221.160 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com 1016110797 ST000 64.48.221.160 (Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:59:57 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:59:57 EST X-UserInfo1: Q[OUS_[DABS]BFPYBJKBNRLI[B]NQHEKFA_J]Q]KEYUNDQUCCNSUAACY@L[ZX__HGFD]JBJNSFXTOOGA_VWY^_HG@FW_HUTHOH]TBPGCO\P^PLP^@[GLHUK@WLECKFVL^TYG[@RMWQXIWM[SDDYWNLG_G[_BWUCHFY_Y@AS@Q[B\APPF@DCZM_PG_VSCPQZM Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:59:57 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21219 Date: 2002-03-14T12:59:57+00:00 List-Id: Hi, Gerald Kasner wrote: > > Reinert Korsnes schrieb: > > > > Hi, > > > It's the algorithm, not the language that matters. Actually, the design of the language is quite significant it terms of how easy it makes it to design a suitable optimizer. FORTRAN 77 should be very easy to optimize so long as you're not using integer pointers and/or aliasing. Fortran 95 is only slightly less "optimizable". C-based languages are somewhat harder to optimize typically because they ENCOURAGE use of pointers and various aliasing tricks. However, some of the difference between Fortran compilers and other languages has something to do with the fact that there are companies with 30+ years experience tweaking their compiler (the FORTRAN 77 ones are largely mature, not to say that all intrinsics are optimal, I keep seeing horrible performance with simple things like circular shift). > > -Gerald -- Gary Scott mailto:scottg@flash.net mailto:webmaster@fortranlib.com http://www.fortranlib.com Support the GNU Fortran G95 Project: http://g95.sourceforge.net