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,f822ae7b0f7433c1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!grolier!oleane.net!oleane!hunter.axlog.fr!nobody From: Jean-Pierre Rosen Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Translating an embedded C algorithm Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:28:49 +0100 Organization: Adalog Message-ID: References: <1168871816.263502.212100@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com> <45ae0afb$0$22524$39db0f71@news.song.fi> <1169040688.133180.20300@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1169129966.683025.63680@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: mailhost.axlog.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: s1.news.oleane.net 1169136064 14317 195.25.228.57 (18 Jan 2007 16:01:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@oleane.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:01:04 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) In-Reply-To: <1169129966.683025.63680@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8261 Date: 2007-01-18T16:28:49+01:00 List-Id: Talulah a �crit : >> There is a least one documented case of Ada producing smaller code than >> hand-optimized assembler. > > I love these statistics. There's a Java vendor who reckons the byte > code runs faster than C as well. You can prove anything if y0ou have > choice over the tools that you use to produce the results. This "hand > coded assembler" could mean anything - it could mean taking Ada > compiled code and ADDING instructions to it! This was not the case. See http://www.acm.org/sigada/education/pages/lawlis.html for the full story > Thinking logically, if the assembler coder was any good, he can always > produce code of equal size to compiled code, and should always produce > tighter code. The reference above has a good explanation why this is not the case. -- --------------------------------------------------------- J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr) Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr