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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,71aa8acfc8368f1c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: BLAS Date: 2000/05/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 622903842 References: X-Trace: news.decus.org 958217940 25950 KILGALLEN [216.44.122.34] Organization: LJK Software Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-05-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Duncan Sands writes: > Gautier wrote: > >> Duncan wrote: >> >> > How important do you think it is to keep Ada 83 compatibility? >> >> Maybe because some Ada83 can be more efficient than their Ada 95 >> replacements. I did not install GNAT on OpenVMS to compare with the >> DEC Ada I'm using, but the latter really rocks; I doubt GNAT can >> be as good as DEC Ada. But globally an Ada95 solution using >> Interfaces.Fortran is preferable. It would be also preferable >> to have the best sort of Ada 95 for each platform with the in-house >> code generator, with e.g. a Lahey Ada95, a DEC Ada 95, a Fujitsu >> Ada 95, but -hum- it's rather a wish... >> >> In fact what is missing is an extensive comparison among >> compilers on each platforms, including Ada and Fortran >> compilers! Unfortunately a published comparison would likely only be made on the basis of performance or features. I heard the author Mark Minasi speak last October about problems in the software industry, and he pointed out that magazine comparisons with a two-dimensional array showing features of competing products was exactly what drove vendors to emphasize new features rather than quality. There is a famous quote from Bill Gates saying that new features are the only thing that sells new versions of software (not better quality). I realize that performance is one aspect of "quality", but I think the more important one is "correctness". I don't like the idea of Ada people being sucked into the mainstream error of considering only that which is most easily measured rather than that which is most important.