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: 103376,9c3a1871d2161925 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-03 12:09:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!feeder.via.net!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: tmoran@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: C/Ada performance comparison References: <3B3C8E6A.39361C75@labe.felk.cvut.cz> X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader Message-ID: <_Lo07.148918$%i7.100501704@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 19:09:46 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.7.82.199 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com 994187386 24.7.82.199 (Tue, 03 Jul 2001 12:09:46 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 12:09:46 PDT Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9391 Date: 2001-07-03T19:09:46+00:00 List-Id: > reimplemented from C to Ada (Linux, GNAT) and now I've found the Ada > program consumes about 7 times more CPU time than the C one. Is it > common case or does it indicate an error in my Ada implementation (I'm > quite new in Ada)? Something is seriously screwed up. Perhaps you are over-using some nice feature that is actually rather expensive? Run a profiler to see where all the time is going. >Is there any comparison/statistics on performance of C/Ada programs? Look in www.adapower.com for some papers on the subject.