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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,35ed85a9d92a025
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada-95 for numerics?
Date: 1996/04/02
Message-ID: <dewar.828452857@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145433567
references: <4jqofv$jtp@rigel.rz.uni-ulm.de>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Thanks for all your postings. First I want to make the following clear:
I am not criticizing the GNAT compiler --- sadly it is the only Ada-95
compiler I am able to use by now. And it is a fine thing to use."

No need to apologize, one of the things you should expect from GNAT
is good performance of generated code. RIght now GNAT will meet this
expectation for some cases but not others :-)

You did not say what machine you are on, or if you did I missed this,
please make this clear, it can make a BIG difference (i.e. do not
assume that GNAT performance measurements on one machine have any
relevance whatsoever to another machine!)