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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,571930b4ff0bc1ee
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-01 11:23:18 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!newsfeed.cwix.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr16.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <3AC03CCE.70E3C2D5@mida.se>
 <OB0w6.272$rl5.40145021@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>
 <3AC18DD1.EF25CE42@mida.se>
 <5mzw6.415$1H6.72722473@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>
 <3AC2EB17.33AAEC0A@mida.se>
 <lEHw6.434$2g1.81555482@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>
 <3AC46252.B7E54EA6@free.fr>
 <xg2x6.2153$db7.413856821@newssvr10-int.news.prodigy.com>
 <3AC4B7F9.7C73455A@free.fr>
 <tfqx6.563$wL.137886776@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>
 <3AC6ED5F.9F2F51A5@free.fr>
Subject: Re: Compile time executed functions
Organization: ex-FlashNet, now Prodigy
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <clKx6.632$ru5.162431072@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.67.101.47
X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr16.news.prodigy.com 986149320 6207069 65.67.101.47 (Sun,
 01 Apr 2001 14:22:00 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 14:22:00 EDT
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 18:22:00 GMT
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6317
Date: 2001-04-01T18:22:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Jean-Marc Bourguet" <jbourguet@free.fr> wrote in message
news:3AC6ED5F.9F2F51A5@free.fr...

: I think there are NO requirement about generated code excepted the
: observable behavior for conforming program.  Everybody would be
: surprised that the generated code for the factorial template I gave
: produced something other than what is generated for
:
: int main() {
:    std::cout << 3628800 << std::endl;
: }

Well, I think you've answered your question, then. You're not talking about
comparing the C++ language with Ada; you're talking about comparing behavior
you were able to produce in one compiler (I assume; have you actually
examined the generated the object code for your example and compiler?) with
other compilers. So, if you want a particular optimization with an Ada
compiler, then you need to look at the object code generated by that
compiler, and tweak it as needed (and possibly work with the vendor to get
what you want).