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,e7e6e919cef50811
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-14 05:24:15 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: comparing gnat/Ada95 and g77
References: <a6prk9$jhc$1@snipp.uninett.no>
 <3C908617.C96A6579@Physik.Uni-Magdeburg.DE> <3C909F9D.6D624B86@flash.net>
From: Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org>
Date: 14 Mar 2002 14:17:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: cdssoph29.cadence.com
Message-ID: <3c90a2cf$1@news.cadence.com>
X-Trace: news.cadence.com 1016111823 cdssoph29.cadence.com (14 Mar 2002
 05:17:03 -0800)
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!nyc.uu.net!news.cadence.com
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21221
Date: 2002-03-14T14:17:01+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Gary Scott <scottg@flash.net> writes:

> Hi,
> Gerald Kasner wrote:
> > 
> > Reinert Korsnes schrieb:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > <snip>
> > 
> > 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.  

That's not the case of Ada.  It is perhaps worse than Fortran, but is
far better than C and C++ on this aspect.

> 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).

Another thing is that raw performance is an important factor in the
Fortran market. 

Yours,

-- 
Jean-Marc