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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,cf34599caf2fa938 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: brashear@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us (Philip Brashear) Subject: Re: GNAT function calling overhead Date: 1995/04/07 Message-ID: <3m395a$58h@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 100070378 references: <3m0nv1$pv2@nef.ens.fr> <3m0psq$fl2@stout.entertain.com> organization: None newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1995-04-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <3m0psq$fl2@stout.entertain.com>, Colin James III wrote: > >At the most abstract level, it's because GNAT is a failed government >project which was never finished and was mismanaged from the start by a >bunch of flaky educators posing as "capable professionals". > >At the most detailed level, it's because GNAT emits poorly optimized, and >hence very evil, C code. > >And what makes anyone think that ACT will change anything with regard to >GNAT support, documentation or enhancements. The ACT principals have >already demonstrated that they failed with GNAT, by even starting ACT. >In other words, if GNAT were such a smashing success and quality product, >then there would be no need for ACT. > >Good grief, what moral and intellectual dishonesty ! I KNOW that one shouldn't waste time responding to either Mr. James or Mr. Aharonian, but this is ridiculous and near the point of libel. First, GNAT is not strictly a government project; other organizations have partially funded it (yes?). Second, it doesn't claim to be finished. Third, I don't believe that it emits C code at all. Fourth, ACT was founded to provide services related to GNAT, not to "finish" it. Colin, for Heaven's sake, learn the meaning of "homework" and "self-control"!!! Phil Brashear