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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,539c04254abf1b37
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-26 11:50:08 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!207.115.63.138!newscon04.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr12.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Pat Rogers" <progers@classwide.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <3C74E519.3F5349C4@baesystems.com>
 <20020221205157.05542.00000012@mb-cm.news.cs.com>
 <3C763746.CC8B2965@baesystems.com> <a55m56$6mk$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <a57ar5$aai1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <a5djrr$m65$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <a5ghiq$9281@news.cis.okstate.edu>
Subject: Re: naval systems
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <qFRe8.1032$jt4.495646881@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.191.180.40
X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com 1014752982 ST000 208.191.180.40 (Tue,
 26 Feb 2002 14:49:42 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 14:49:42 EST
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
X-UserInfo1: 
 [[PAPDCAOXRQRILY@BJZ\_TDFRYB@GXLN@GZ_GYO^ZUDUWYAKVUOPCW[ML\JXUCKVFDYZKBMSFX^OMSAFNTINTDDMVW[X\THOPXZRVOCJTUTPC\_JSBVX\KAOTBAJBVMZTYAKMNLDI_MFDSSOLXINH__FS^\WQGHGI^C@E[A_CF\AQLDQ\BTMPLDFNVUQ_VM
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:49:42 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20471
Date: 2002-02-26T19:49:42+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"David Starner" <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> wrote in message
news:a5ghiq$9281@news.cis.okstate.edu...
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 10:05:30 -0500, Marin David Condic
<dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[> wrote:
<snip>
> > In general, I just don't see compilation speed as a big deal these days and
> > Ada is competitively fast when compared to C.
>
> But GNAT is noticably slower than gcc, and you can't claim that Ada
> compilers are as fast as C compilers, and then argue that it doesn't
> matter when someone pushes the point. Be honest; point out that Ada
> compilers are fast enough, instead.

I don't understand this.  GNAT *is* gcc.