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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d901a50a5adfec3c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,9f0bf354542633fd X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public From: Gautier.DeMontmollin@maths.unine.ch Subject: Re: Fortran or Ada? Date: 1998/09/29 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 396004531 References: <36068E73.F0398C54@meca.polymtl.ca> <19980928.184428.604@yktvmv.watson.ibm.com> Organization: University of Neuchatel, Switzerland Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > It appears to me that this implicates Ada in at least two > respects: > 1. It appears the developers were having trouble meeting their > performance target tempting them to cut corners. Ada is of course > notoriously inefficient. Some Ada compilers may be inefficient; there is at least one which is very efficient: GNAT. Among advanced optimisations, it includes cross-package inlining, which is just impossible with non modular languages like F77 or C++... > 2. It appears there is no cheap way of turning off conversion > error checking in Ada, tempting programmers to leave it active in > inappropriate places. "gnatmake -gnatp xyz" compiles the whole xyz program (with depending packages) without any check (like pragma supress_all). Try to find simpler or cheaper... -- Gautier -------- Homepage: http://www.unine.ch/math/Personnel/Assistants/Gautier/Montmollin.html Software: http://www.unine.ch/math/Personnel/Assistants/Gautier/Gaut_FTP.htm