Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada

[pitre@n5160d.nrl.navy.mil (Richard Pitre)]

In article <4j173h$lvo@oravannahka.Helsinki.FI> cjjohans@cc.Helsinki.FI (Carl J  
R Johansson) writes:
> 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.
> 

I don't know, but I would guess that it depends on the compiler implentation
more than the language unless a language doesn't support critical
features. While any programmer can 
implement anything the compiler won't necessarily be able to 
optimize it as well as  a built in feature. 
Those kinds of features aside its my guess is that C++ and Ada compilers are 
roughly equivalent in the efficiency of the code that they generate. 

richard