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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newspeer1.nwr.nac.net!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!ken-transit.news.telstra.net!ken-in.news.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "robin" <robin_v@bigpond.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
 <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
 <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <To_cg.10095$S7.4017@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:50:27 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.139.71.211
X-Complaints-To: abuse@bigpond.net.au
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1148482227 144.139.71.211 (Thu,
 25 May 2006 00:50:27 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 00:50:27 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4411 comp.lang.fortran:10196
Date: 2006-05-24T14:50:27+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dick Hendrickson" <dick.hendrickson@att.net> wrote in message
news:PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> Ada's is surely better.  Knowing that a subscript has to be
> in range, because it's checked when a value is assigned to
> the subscript variable, has to be more efficient than what
> Fortran can do. In general, Fortran has to check the value
> of the subscripts on every array reference.

It can do this only if it is a compiler option.
It is not a feature the language.

>  In practice,
> most array references take place in DO loops and compilers
> can usually hoist the checks outside the loop, so they have
> minimal cost at run time.