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-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d
X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:42:42 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Organization: future apps GmbH
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050105 Debian/1.7.5-1
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada)
References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>
 <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org>
 <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk>
 <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02>
 <d0dkq6$781$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
 <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <112rs0bdr2aftdf@corp.supernews.com>
 <1inxxr988rxgg$.1w9dedak41k89.dlg@40tude.net>
 <112s1r0rf0o8nca@corp.supernews.com> <d0l2gq$egt$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 <112sonip5v4dca6@corp.supernews.com>
 <E1vXd.352556$w62.20389@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <112t3de6fu04f38@corp.supernews.com>
In-Reply-To: <112t3de6fu04f38@corp.supernews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <422ee0ce$0$1091$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Mar 2005 12:41:02 MET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 02c9fb27.newsread2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=b;l?F9FNkB[YFAnNd=0_4TQ5U85hF6f;TjW\KbG]kaMXliQbn6H@_EYHK^AD[CXBH\ljUVjRQ60?RVmnOeiOY3@^g[50F7T5IOR
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8925 comp.realtime:1117
 comp.software-eng:4676
Date: 2005-03-09T12:41:02+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

CTips wrote:

> In fact, to get the performance similar to that which 
> can be obtained in C, one would pretty much have to write in the C 
> subset of Ada [i.e. turn off most of the checking, use libraries written 
> in C + asm].

Is there any significant evidence for this other than
special cases for any of the languages discussed?

And why on earth should translators for programming languages
be so dumb as to produce fast code only when the input language
is like "the C subset"?
If a compiler knows about enum values and can use them in the
construction of objects matching hardware, or of arrays of bytes,
or whatever, why should the enum values incur a speed penalty?
Because the compiler checks that there is static matching
at compile time?

> And even there I'd have my doubts - given the additional 
> features that Ada compilers have to deal with, I doubt that they would 
> have focused as much on the optimizations.

Given that the language provides
  pragma Optimize (Time/Space/Off)
I doubt that this general doubt can be justified.

> (How can you get beaten by Python? The mind boggles!)

Easy. You are not actually beaten by Python, but by a highly
optimized C matrix library which is bound to python as an
extension.
If you're interested, for Ada 2005, ISO vector and matrix
subprograms are added to the language standard.


Georg