Re: Need some light on using Ada or not

[Brian Drummond <brian_drummond@btconnect.com>]

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:42:06 -0800 (PST), jonathan <johnscpg@googlemail.com>
wrote:

>
>> On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:36:45 +0100, Georg Bauhaus
>>
>> C #includes <apr_pool.h>, that is, it exercises the Apache memory pool,
>> not what is available with plain C.
>>
>> C++ #includes a similar thing from the Boost libraries.
>
>
>On Feb 19, 6:25 pm, Brian Drummond <brian_drumm...@btconnect.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> even though you are not allowed to supply your own pool.
>> Possibly harsh, but I can see the logic behind it.
>
>Free lists are forbidden also.
>
>The rules could not be clearer:
>
>   Please don't implement your own custom memory pool or
>   free list.

I read the rule differently; and here's my understanding of the logic behind it:

Use any memory pool and/or free list you like, as long as they are publicly
available (e.g. from Boost, Apache, perhaps the Booch Ada Components etc) but
don't create one specifically tuned for the benchmark.

Thus it encourages quality of not only language and compiler implementation, but
also libraries and other re-usable components. Which is realistic, because they
are part of the package you would consider when choosing a language for a
project.

>A few more observations.
>
>First a minor point: On my machine I can make the Ada version the
>same speed as the (single core) C#1 and the C++#2  (about 10%
>faster) with a small change (I placed the patch at the
>end of post).

So, like for like, Ada has the same performance...

>So here's the puzzle. How do the C#7 and C++#6 programs
>(single core) run so much faster.
>
>The  C++#6 uses the Boost library's "object_pool.hpp", so I
>suggest we go straight to the magical source code:
>
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/files/boost/1.45.0/

... but the available C/C++ libraries are more highly tuned (or cheat...)?

- Brian