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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,54889de51045a215 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-21 06:26:50 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stueberl.de!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "Alexandre E. Kopilovitch" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: += in ada Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:22:19 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1066742721 5120 80.67.180.195 (21 Oct 2003 13:25:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:25:21 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: ; from Hyman Rosen at Tue, 21 Oct 2003 03:30:43 GMT X-Mailer: Mail/@ [v2.44 MSDOS] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p5 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1284 Date: 2003-10-21T17:22:19+04:00 Hyman Rosen wrote: > > Do you mean that they inserted hand-written machine code in some places? > > If not then they still were "leaving it to compiler", I think. > > They went through several places where arithmetic overflow could > conceivably happen, deciding on a case-by-case basis whether the > external constraints on the data would justify omitting the check. > They did this in order to free up processor cycles to get the duty > cycle velow a prescribed maximum. All right, they measured timings, and perhaps they read compiler output and really counted cycles - so what? They still trusted compiler for its work, including optimization, and didn't try to replace it in critical places by hand-written machine code. They surely used language features for influencing compiler output - so what? Those language features was included in the language exactly for that purpose. > You may look at that through Ada- > colored glasses if you like and call it still leaving it to the > compiler. Particular language, Ada in the case, is completely irrelevant here. I would say the same for any language, including C++ (and even Java -;) in similar circumstances. And I'm so sure of that because I know too well (from my own experience) what is true hand-made optimization at the machine code level. Alexander Kopilovitch aek@vib.usr.pu.ru Saint-Petersburg Russia