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: 103376,7b73eb137e4ed638
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-16 04:25:43 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!193.162.153.118!news.tele.dk!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <3CE39722.60208@gmx.spam.egg.sausage.and.spam.net>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:25:22 +0200
From: David Rasmussen <david.rasmussen@gmx.spam.egg.sausage.and.spam.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020412 Debian/0.9.9-6
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Compilers
References: <3CE2AF22.2060208@gmx.spam.egg.sausage.and.spam.net>
 <slrnae72nu.29a.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: TDC Internet
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.215.62.2
X-Trace: 1021548342 dtext.news.tele.dk 81121 195.215.62.2
X-Complaints-To: abuse@post.tele.dk
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24176
Date: 2002-05-16T13:25:22+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol wrote:
> 
> What do you mean how good is code generation?
> 

I mean how good is the generated machine code on various CPU's (x86 for 
instance) with typical Ada compilers as compared with typical C++ compilers?