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: 2001-12-05 09:12:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What is faster Ada or C? Date: 5 Dec 2001 11:12:15 -0600 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: References: <3c08314d$0$158$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de> <3C0BA624.7A12BFA1@boeing.com> <9ugotc$rjl$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <9ulg5q$cj0$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1007572337 24818 192.135.80.34 (5 Dec 2001 17:12:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17457 Date: 2001-12-05T11:12:15-06:00 List-Id: In article <9ulg5q$cj0$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>, Georg Bauhaus writes: > Pascal Obry wrote: > > : Here is the GNAT 5 output: "-S -gnatp" > : > : .text > ... > : L2: > : cmpl $1000, -8(%ebp) > : jle L5 > : jmp L3 > : L5: > : leal -4(%ebp), %eax > : incl (%eax) > : leal -8(%ebp), %eax > : incl (%eax) > : jmp L2 > : L3: > ... > > So now even assembler output is more reader friendly. > Must be Ada influence :-) :-) Perhaps the program was optimized for speed or size rather than for reader friendliness. I don't know that instruction set, but there are various issues in some instruction sets regarding branch prediction and register usage that mean the most optimized code is likely to be the least obvious.