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: f5d71,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-12 05:54:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) Followup-To: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PVV Message-ID: References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org> <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com> <2460735.u7KiuvdgQP@linux1.krischik.com> <54759e7e.0402081525.50c7adae@posting.google.com> <54759e7e.0402091826.2847e0c@posting.google.com> <54759e7e.0402101819.95cec1d@posting.google.com> <402A29B4.3010807@noplace.com> <402B763E.4000309@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: k-083152.nt.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1076594069 28278 129.241.83.152 (12 Feb 2004 13:54:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:54:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5483 comp.lang.c:22075 comp.lang.c++:18890 comp.lang.java:2877 Date: 2004-02-12T13:54:29+00:00 List-Id: ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.ada.] On 2004-02-12, Marin David Condic wrote: > > Too many people spend too much time agonizing over "Compiler Efficiency" > - usually without any real scientific data to back up their perceptions > of what is fast and what is slow - and most of the time it just plain > doesn't matter. I'd bet that if we took most of the applications that > people use on a daily basis and inserted random delay statements > throughout them to double the amount of CPU cycles they use, nobody > would notice any difference in how they got their job done. Yes. It is like debating which car is best and safest by how far the speedometer goes and not caring if it has a seat belt or not. C/C++ do not have seat belts. -- "Saving keystrokes is the job of the text editor, not the programming language."