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: a07f3367d7,13280cdb905844e4 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: "John B. Matthews" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is there an Ada compiler whose Ada.Numerics.Generic_Elementary_Functions.Log(Base=>10, X=>variable) is efficient? Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:02:08 -0500 Organization: The Wasteland Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: LQJtZWzu+iKlBROuDg+IUg.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9228 Date: 2010-02-15T08:02:08-05:00 List-Id: In article , Colin Paul Gloster wrote: > gnatmake -O3 logarithmic_work_in_Ada.adb -o > logarithmic_work_in_Ada_compiled_by_GNAT > > time ./logarithmic_work_in_Ada_compiled_by_GNAT > 6.34086408536266E+08 > > real 1m33.338s > user 1m33.338s > sys 0m0.000s I get a different answer: 698970 = 1000000 * (log10(50) - 1). $ make clean logada ; time ./logada rm -f *.o *.ali b~* core logada gnatmake logada -cargs -O3 -gnatwa -bargs -shared -largs -dead_strip gcc -c -O3 -gnatwa logada.adb gnatbind -shared -x logada.ali gnatlink logada.ali -shared-libgcc -dead_strip 6.98970004334243E+05 real 0m0.138s user 0m0.136s sys 0m0.002s -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com