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,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: cjjohans@cc.Helsinki.FI (Carl J R Johansson)
Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
Date: 1996/03/23
Message-ID: <4j173h$lvo@oravannahka.Helsinki.FI>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143863501
references: <9603041841.AA18366@eight-ball> <4hg318$nup@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
organization: University of Helsinki
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Richard Pitre (pitre@n5160d.nrl.navy.mil) wrote:

: In software and language design there is a conflict between the need for  
: machine efficiency and our limited ability to manage complexity. The  
: differences between Ada and C++ can be fruitfully discussed  in terms of the  
: different compromises which were made in their designs in order to deal with  
: this conflict.  It is my understanding that the implementers of both languages  
: struggled mightily with this issue. To my knowledge, there is no universal  
: ideal compromise.

So, is C really so much more efficient than other languages (I do not
question the efficiency of assembly, just C/C++) and is it not just a
myth? Does anyone have figures on this? I don't think a difference of a
few microseconds has any practical implications if that is what is
referred to. 

Of course measuring can be a bit difficult, both applications should
probably be done by one person equally fluent in both languages (and
unbiased) and on the same platform (without any inline assembly). 
If possible s/he should probably be as experienced as possible. 

With efficiency I mean raw speed and not memory usage etc.

carl.johansson@helsinki.fi
http://www.helsinki.fi/cjjohans/