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-Thread: 103376,47fc49812a5e8e38 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.in2p3.fr!in2p3.fr!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: small example, using complex variables in Ada Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:59:30 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Message-ID: References: <6e70b80b-3030-479f-8378-d1281d1fa847@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <9648de08-0477-40d7-a2ea-0e13e771e94d@z8g2000yqz.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1276282772 21908 69.95.181.76 (11 Jun 2010 18:59:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:59:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12621 Date: 2010-06-11T13:59:30-05:00 List-Id: "Colin Paul Gloster" wrote in message news:alpine.LNX.2.00.1006111207170.3608@Bluewhite64.example.net... ... > If any of you claims that you posted an unclear phrase which had not > been intended to be libelous which looks like you accused me of > inappropriately trying to apply premature optimization, then clarify > or be sued for libel. Don't be so sensitive! Optimization is premature unless there is a demonstrated need for additional performance. In any case, being guilty of premature optimization has almost no reflection on how good or bad of a programmer you are (something I am not in any position to judge). The best programmers are still guilty of it from time to time. I know I've been guilty of it multiple times, and it is useful to have outsiders point that out, in order that I don't repeat the same mistake on my next project. And it's very useful to repeat the mantra over and over, in order to reduce the temptation. > You had already known that I had made major > improvements in speed to simulations which I depend on in order to > stay alive this year (unfortunately the funding shall end in December > 2010 no matter how well I do), and that speeding up just one per cent > results in a valuable improvement of hours. Sure there are cases like that; your work application has a demonstrated need for more performance. Such situations are rare, however. I spent a lot of effort optimizing lookup times in our spam filter, only to find out that it wasn't a signifiant percentage of the filtering effort. And you have to know that I have been writing optimizing Ada compilers for the last 30 years (well, 29 years and 9 months to be exact), so I know how to performance optimize when necessary. But... > Nasser M. Abbasi was not reverting to Ada as a complement to > Mathematica with the objective of producing slower software than > Mathematica. My understanding was that the OP was comparing the readability and ease-of-creation of Fortran and Ada. I saw no indication that he was concerned about the performance. And in many cases, the performance of the code isn't very relevant. (Remember the 90/10 rule!) In the absence of a demonstrated need for better performance, making the code less readable is a bad idea, no matter what effect it has on performance. That's exactly the definition of premature optimization, in my opinion. Randy. P.S. I wouldn't waste time on suing someone. Only the lawyers make money in most lawsuits.