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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d575f572a099528
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-04 14:41:43 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-was.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-han1.dfn.de!news.fh-hannover.de!news.cid.net!news.enyo.de!news1.enyo.de!not-for-mail
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What is faster Ada or C?
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 00:00:17 +0100
Organization: Enyo's not your organization
Message-ID: <871yia7fr2.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
References: <3c08314d$0$158$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de>
 <pdxu1vb67fq.fsf@sirppi.helsinki.fi> <3c0b3bc8.334020@news.demon.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ydkt4Xo0DiN8J3uDXQg/dPCSsVg=
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17417
Date: 2001-12-05T00:00:17+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

john.mccabe@emrad.com.nospam (John McCabe) writes:

>>(Also, I would imagine that with Ada's strong typing, the compiler can
>>do better optimizations than an average C compiler. However, I don't
>>have any evidence for this...)
>
> It's been mentioned before on a couple of occasions, but Tartan (as
> was) wrote a paper identifying why their Ada compiler produced faster
> code than assembler.

This is pure marketing, of course.  Hand-tuned assembler code will
always be as fast as or outperform code generated by compilers because
a human programmer can always take the code generated by a compiler if
he cannot do any better, while the compiler hasn't got this option.