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=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,99a6311c4195e21b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,99a6311c4195e21b
X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public
From: "Pascal Obry" <p.obry@der.edf.fr>
Subject: Re: Matrix Multiplication
Date: 1999/12/16
Message-ID: <83a83t$qnb$1@clnews.edf.fr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 561521915
References: <385699B5.59C14D03@lmco.com> <01bf4708$99ef98f0$022a6282@dieppe>
 <wcchfhkxjeg.fsf@world.std.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Complaints-To: newsadm@news.edf.fr
X-Trace: clnews.edf.fr 945333181 27371 130.98.42.146 (16 Dec 1999 08:33:01
 GMT)
Organization: EDF
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Dec 1999 08:33:01 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran
Date: 1999-12-16T08:33:01+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com> a �crit dans le message :
wcchfhkxjeg.fsf@world.std.com...
> I do.  A fast language is one for which it is feasible to build
> compilers that generate fast code.  A slow language is one for which
> that is not feasible.

I pretty well understand that, but we are then talking about implementation
in a compiler.

>
> Also I prefer to put the burden of proof on the language advocates --
> that is, a language should be considered "slow" until proven "fast" by
> the existence of at least one good production-quality compiler.
>
> By this definition, Smalltalk, for example, is slow -- I've never seen a
> Smalltalk compiler that can generate fast code.  Furthermore, it seems

Ok, we have never seen one, but is it really impossible ? I do remember
something about IBM creating a Smalltalk compiler, is that true ? How
fast was it ?

> impossible, without doing all code generation at link time, which I
> claim is not feasible in many cases.
>
> I don't know whether Fortran is faster than Ada at matrix multiplies,
> but it does seem like a meaningful question to ask.  If you measured

This still seems a stange question to me! Certainly the algorithm used in
the implementation as more to do with the speed than the language itself.

Pascal.

--

--|------------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                               Team-Ada Member |
--|                                                           |
--| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- T T I                                    |
--|                       Intranet: http://cln46gb            |
--| Bureau N-023            e-mail: pascal.obry@edf.fr        |
--| 1 Av G�n�ral de Gaulle  voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91         |
--| 92141 Clamart CEDEX     fax   : +33-1-47.65.50.07         |
--| FRANCE                                                    |
--|------------------------------------------------------------
--|
--|   http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pascal_obry
--|
--|   "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"