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: 103376,5cb36983754f64da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,304c86061dc69dba
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,304c86061dc69dba
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,2746b4897cd9baa7
X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-13 07:09:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!p5087c00b.dip0.t-ipconnect.DE!not-for-mail
From: Jan C. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vorbr=FCggen?= <jvorbrueggen@mediasec.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Ada performance (was No call for Ada )
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:09:05 +0100
Organization: MediaSec Technologies GmbH
Message-ID: <402CE891.D04E88D7@mediasec.de>
References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org>
 <m3isij11u4.fsf_-_@insalien.org>
 <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com>
 <2460735.u7KiuvdgQP@linux1.krischik.com>
 <54759e7e.0402081525.50c7adae@posting.google.com>
 <Xns9489AEC0F8702jimmaureenrogers@204.127.36.1>
 <54759e7e.0402091826.2847e0c@posting.google.com>
 <vjah20tahj48fftkpeghp29ugnojfdd4r4@4ax.com>
 <54759e7e.0402101819.95cec1d@posting.google.com>
 <Xns948BEEE63371Ajimmaureenrogers@204.127.36.1>
 <88dc613b.0402121520.bf939f8@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p5087c00b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (80.135.192.11)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1076684951 41683159 D 80.135.192.11 ([125976])
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [de] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: de
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5530 comp.lang.c:22292
 comp.lang.c++:19021 comp.lang.fortran:4939
Date: 2004-02-13T16:09:05+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> 2. Arrays are unaliased in Ada (as I understood), much like in
> FORTRAN, which may be beneficial in terms of performance (given that
> the compiler takes advantage of this, and I believe, in case of GCC,
> it does)

AFAIK it cannot, at least not fully, because the GCC intermediate language
lacks the means to express the necessary semantics. The G95 guys are 
getting the required stuff into the next GCC release.

> P.S. BTW is the code generated by IFC as fast as G77 on modern CPUs
> (P4 and Athlon)? Is it worth bothering with IFC on benchmarks, etc.?

Apart from implementing F95+ instead of F77+, IFC appears to be the
SPEC CPU compiler at the moment for x86 processors.

	Jan