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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,83c3aa00160f1010 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-07 09:54:12 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!blanket.mitre.org!linus.mitre.org!linus!mbunix!eachus From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Fortran to Ada Date: 7 Nov 94 11:09:35 Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA. Message-ID: References: <9411032048.AA02784@eight-ball.hv.boeing.com.hv.boeing.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: spectre.mitre.org In-reply-to: Bob Crispen's message of Thu, 3 Nov 1994 14:48:53 CST Date: 1994-11-07T11:09:35+00:00 List-Id: A (possibly partly apocryphal--I wasn't at the final presentation) incident from the early days of Ada: We were asked to recode some existing FORTRAN code in Ada and report on the relative performace. A quick line-for-line translation resulted in an immediate CONSTRAINT_ERROR. The fix was fairly obvious and off to find the next one. Two weeks (and seventeen bug fixes) later we had an Ada version that survived the regression suite developed for the FORTRAN version, but it gave different answers. (The seventeen bug number is amazing since this was about 850 original SLOC, the fixed version was larger.) So we made "the same" corrections in the FORTRAN source, and we had two different language versions which produced identical output. Now finally we could do the benchmarking... The Ada version was significantly slower (about 25%) than the original FORTRAN version and very slightly (about 2%) faster than the fixed FORTRAN version. But this code was in the OS scheduling software. When we put the fixed version in there, everything ran faster. Then this was presented to senior management. At about slide two, the presentation was halted to find out how such badly broken code could get through quality control and out the door. After standing there for almost an hour, the presenter got to his next slide, and was asked why he bothered presenting results with the "broken" FORTRAN. He then explained that the fixes had yet to be accepted by QC, since the new software didn't pass the regression tests... That meeting made the Ada group some enemies that lasted until well after I left the company. I've since had many similar experiences, and my expectation has become that ALL FORTRAN numerics code is full of bugs, even my own. -- Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...