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!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:27:08 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@user1.uni-duisburg.de>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, 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>
 <422ee0ce$0$1091$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
 <112v9p788s1684d@corp.supernews.com>
 <42307820$0$26539$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
 <1132e5g2cor3oe2@corp.supernews.com>
In-Reply-To: <1132e5g2cor3oe2@corp.supernews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <42329994$0$1093$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Mar 2005 08:26:12 MET
NNTP-Posting-Host: ad331e10.newsread2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=4RD5nJMfTm5LL2:TY8[@n6Q5U85hF6f;4jW\KbG]kaM8liQbn6H@_E9VEfmGSCIWn=8JM^O\[iId3^0dG=GSCo84
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9203 comp.realtime:1339
 comp.software-eng:4906
Date: 2005-03-12T08:26:12+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

CTips wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> 
> 
>> Done. You might be disappointed by the results. In short:
>> < 1%, < 3%; and < 8% for a different program, really.
> 
> 
> I'm not disappointed at all, in fact the numbers are way worse than I 
> expected, [...]

> You have to be *very* careful that what you're measuring isn't hidden 
> behind some other effect.

I admit that I was measuring relative performance of a program
written in two programming languages. And I didn't want to write
a benchmark program; how useful, well-defined, etc. are they.

Out of curiosity, if a 1.03x slowdown is far worse than expected,
than what is a not-so-bad slowdown that would make you say o.K.
to checks?

> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> #define N 50000

... (more and hopefully better results in another post)

Georg