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: fac41,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 108717,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: 
 gide91fe56a56,gida07f3367d7,gid8d81cdf253,gid5b1e799cdb,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!198.186.194.249.MISMATCH!transit3.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!postnews3.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.pascal,comp.programming
Subject: Re: Alternatives to C: ObjectPascal, Eiffel, Ada or Modula-3?
References: <h3sln0$rhm$2@news.eternal-september.org>
 <4BA8BA91.4050905@cherrystonesoftware.com>
From: Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net>
Date: 23 Mar 2010 10:31:04 -0700
Message-ID: <w9zr5nbhrmv.fsf@zipcon.net>
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Organization: The Zip Connection (zipcon.net)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7de1b508.news.zipcon.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=7<O3_P]M6D]gRm3LG_>=ZPU>Dm5d6:E6]8<@m6P[oW[Y6i3K@k4DWOQRmIPlRn4odW1F3`N\7j_X_
X-Complaints-To: abuse@zipcon.net
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.eiffel:570 comp.lang.ada:10673
 comp.lang.modula3:139 comp.programming:16447
Date: 2010-03-23T10:31:04-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

balson <labrat@cherrystonesoftware.com> writes:

> 
> 	Where's performance on this list?  Do you not care how fast the 
> applications run? Look at the following white paper to see if 
> performance should or shoild not be high on your list if you are 
> considering changing development languages:
> 
> http://www.cherrystonesoftware.com/doc/AlgorithmicPerformance.pdf
> 
> 	What this WP documents is we took 5 basic very common computer science 
> algorithms and wrote them in different languages: C/C++, Java and C# and 
> then benchmarked them against each other. If performance is of any 
> concern to you, you'd stiff with C/C++.
> 
> 	IOW, stay away from the likes of Java, C#, Pascal. Unless you have a 
> very specific reason for going in that direction. Your performance will 
> suffer.

[snip]

I looked at the paper on the web page you point at.  Why do you not
distinguish between C and C++?  They are significantly different
languages.  If you use C++, performance will probably suffer compared
to C.

Why are you making statements about Pascal's performance?  While
Pascal has some annoying limitations for the programmer, it is very
fast.  If you tested it, where's the results?  If you didn't test it,
why are you making disparaging comments about it?

Performance only sometimes comes from better performance on the same
code.  Most of the time, performance gains come from writing a
better algorithm.  Programmers are better off chosing a language
well-suited to the problem.  Then if performance isn't good, figure
out where it's slow and improve that part of the code.

-- Patrick