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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,47327673b9e29af0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-17 05:59:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!193.162.153.118!news.tele.dk!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3D0DDD18.7090501@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:59:04 +0200 From: David Rasmussen 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 -> C or C++ translator References: <3D0DD57A.5000402@yahoo.com> <3d0dda3d$1@pull.gecm.com> 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: 1024318742 dtext.news.tele.dk 715 195.215.62.2 X-Complaints-To: abuse@post.tele.dk Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26143 Date: 2002-06-17T14:59:04+02:00 List-Id: Martin Dowie wrote: > > Why do you suspect that an Ada compiler won't give you decent performance? > The performance of today's Ada95 compilers seem pretty much on a par with > the C/C++ compilers I'm using. There is an argument that they should be > able to produce more efficient code too but other than the 'famous' Tartan > compiler paper, I have yet to see much evidence of this. > > Didn't Averstar/Intermetric's Ada compiler use 'C' as an intermediate > representation? > There might exist good Ada compilers. But I use free tools. I use gcc for Ada, and while it has a good x86 backend, there exist other free compilers such as the free Intel C++ and others that produce even better code. Such a translator would give more choice to the programmer. /David