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-Thread: 103376,382fcf8feeefdd50 X-Google-Thread: 1014db,382fcf8feeefdd50 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1014db,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!flpi089.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!cfe18fef!not-for-mail From: Gary Scott Organization: Home User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: computer language used to program Mars Lander References: <185ee7f9-9d4f-4f49-8dbe-6b623b8a8223@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> <887fc0a7-0a5a-4d2e-a9ea-eb9e32d6a818@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <13a2f4f0-6ec1-4570-b6bf-1621cfb32db2@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com> <4880f2ed$1_6@news.bluewin.ch> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.94.45.251 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com 1216415663 ST000 68.94.45.251 (Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:14:23 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:14:23 EDT X-UserInfo1: TSU[@I_AOXWQB_LZBZOB_QDBAJT@QDDMEPWXODMMHXMTWA]EPUUEAE[YETZPIWWI[FCIZA^NBFXZ_D[BFNTCNVPDTNTKHWXKB@X^B_OCJLPZ@ET_O[G\XSG@E\G[ZKVLBL^CJINM@I_KVIOR\T_M_AW_M[_BWU_HFA_]@A_A^SGFAUDE_DFTMQPFWVW[QPJN Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:14:13 -0500 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1219 comp.lang.c:9957 Date: 2008-07-18T16:14:13-05:00 List-Id: jacob navia wrote: > Gautier wrote: > >> Paul Hsieh: >> >>> The small memory footprint and VxWorks environment probably makes C a >>> very attractive language for the NASA guys. If they used Ada, they >>> would be slower, >> >> >> Oooh... This is a misconception that comes from the time of >> non-optimizing compilers for PC's - around 20 years ago. At that time >> a i++ was faster than a i:= i + 1, sure. But it was long long time >> ago. Never heard of GCC ?... >> _________________________________________________________ >> Gautier's Ada programming -- http://sf.net/users/gdemont/ >> >> NB: For a direct answer, e-mail address on the Web site! > > > Do you have any data to prove that ADA is faster than C? There should in general be no difference other than that there may be some constructs that are harder for the compiler writer to figure out how to optimize in one language versus the other. Probably works both ways. > Or that has a smaller memory footprint? > > > -- Gary Scott mailto:garylscott@sbcglobal dot net Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org -OR- Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done. -- Henry Ford