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,b30bd69fa8f63cb2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-11 06:01:28 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!213.200.246.247!not-for-mail
From: Vinzent Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: C bug of the day
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:59:57 +0200
Organization: JeLlyFish software
Message-ID: <bc7976$fpiv9$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
References: <bc4n70$fei5u$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <slrnbeboi5.1qc.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <d6652001.0306110122.7be294f7@posting.google.com>
 <20030611114948.00000bcc._elh_@_terma_._com_>
 <bc6vaa$gbhrd$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <20030611125000.000018b5._elh_@_terma_._com_>
 <bc72l9$g1lkv$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <20030611132925.000001ea._elh_@_terma_._com_>
 <bc75j6$g2q7g$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <20030611143832.00000a74._elh_@_terma_._com_>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.200.246.247
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1055336487 16567273 213.200.246.247 (16 [175126])
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38983
Date: 2003-06-11T14:59:57+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Erlo Haugen wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:58:05 +0200
>Vinzent Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com> wrote:
>
>> Erlo Haugen wrote:
>>=20
>> >On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:08:02 +0200
>> >Vinzent Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com> wrote:
>> >>=20
>> >> At least for 6502 and Z80 exist C-compilers, so I don't see why =
there
>> >> shouldn't be any Ada-Compiler. I even remember playing around with
>>=20
>> >Efficiency ??=20
>>=20
>> Well, I don't see what would make Ada-compiled code less efficient
>> that C-compiled code. :)
>
>Perhaps not, but C need to implement pointers, which Ada don't.

Well, just because Ada hides pointers from the programmer to a large
amount that doesn't mean, it does not have them at all.

This is more an compiler implementation issue. IMO, as an example, a
good thing is that an Ada compiler would be free to choose whether a
parameter to a function is given by value or by reference, depending
on what seems more efficient either for time or space optimizations.
Assuming a rather good optimizing compiler, the compiler's choice
could actually be the better one. In C the compiler is bound to
implement the programmer's choice, whether is seems efficient or not.

Of course, it could also be the other way around. ;)

>> Or do you mean, that programming HLL on those machines is quite
>> inefficient in general?
>>
>If the ram area is small and the registers awkward, yes. (MC68705 in =
variuos
>versions comes to mind.)

Well, in that case, ACK.


Vinzent.

--=20
Parents strongly cautioned  --  this  posting  is  intended for mature
audiences  over  18.  It  may  contain some material that many parents
would not find suitable for children and may include intense violence,
sexual situations, coarse language and suggestive dialogue.