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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,90c3c79963d78580 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-05-11 11:58:27 PST Path: archiver1.sj.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!skynet.be!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Numerical Computation and Ada95 Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:28:50 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9dhb14$4v4$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <9dc4sh$ru5$1@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr> <9deus2$8t6$1@ulysses.noc.ntua.gr> <9dh4ol$s9g$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 989605732 5092 136.170.200.133 (11 May 2001 18:28:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 May 2001 18:28:52 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.sj.google.com comp.lang.ada:7404 Date: 2001-05-11T18:28:52+00:00 List-Id: I was afraid to say anything because its been so long since I regularly used Fortran that I couldn't be sure that later versions of the language didn't add features of which I was not aware. When I *was* a Fortran programmer and started learning Ada, I was very impressed with the fact that Ada seemed to have so much better support for math than did Fortran. (Aside from lack of Log & trig at the time. :-) Certainly, Ada has added lots of new mathematical capabilities in Ada95 only by now I don't know if Fortran has caught up. At the time, I was very impressed that Ada let you specify the accuracy you required and/or check the accuracy that was available. Ada defined model numbers and safe numbers that gave one a model for understanding how calculations were going to be made & thus one could plan for it. Fortran basically left the mechanics of the computations up to the machine with no rigorous formal definition of behavior. (Or at least it was not nearly as rigorous as the definition Ada provided.) Lots of this is a major aid in numerical analysis when you're trying to figure out how good your computations are going to be. Now the numerous attributes available for numeric types as well as adding support for decimal & modular types would have me claiming that there is quite a bit more support in Ada for number crunching than one gets with Fortran - but the last Fortran I used was Fortran77. If later versions have caught up, I'd like to know about it, but I'd recommend that Fortran number crunchers take a serious look at Ada's numeric support because they just might find it to be superior. (That, and its hard to beat Generics for building computations once & reusing them with different numeric types!) MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Jean-Pierre Rosen" wrote in message news:9dh4ol$s9g$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net... > An other point I'm surprised nobody mentionned: > Provided your compiler supports Annex F, you get guarantees about the numerical accuracies of computations, *including* the accuracy > of the math library. > AFAIK, Fortran tells you nothing about the accuracy of sin, log, etc. So if you are concerned not only by fast results, but also by > accurate results, Ada is a big winner. >