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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,325a055bed62c230
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Apex vs GNAT on solaris
Date: 1999/12/08
Message-ID: <82kuc0$ji0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 557811978
References: <82hiuj$74o$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <82hnll$ahu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <384cfdb3.691883075@newsnew.draper.com> <82j35q$9281@news.cis.okstate.edu>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x27.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Dec 08 06:37:52 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-12-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <82j35q$9281@news.cis.okstate.edu>,
  dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org wrote:
> Yes. GCC defaults to fast compilation. If you want good code,
> turn optimization on. It's definetly not fair to benchmark
                                           ^^^^

The issue is not so much fairness, as meaningfulness of the
results. When people publish comparative timings, you sort
of assume that the subtext is:

"look and see which compiler is faster"

But if you don't take care to make the figures meaningful,
the true subtext is something like:

"here are some random non-comparable figures from which nothing
 can be usefully deduced"

> GNAT at -O0 (the default) unless you're timing the compiler
> itself.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.