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: 103376,80435549e92d4e0c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Charles container library usage examples Date: 11 Sep 2005 20:21:30 -0400 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: <87mzmssqbq.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4321a2e0_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1126484491 1637 192.74.137.71 (12 Sep 2005 00:21:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:21:30 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4580 Date: 2005-09-11T20:21:30-04:00 List-Id: David Trudgett writes: > Slow execution is also somewhat relative. Ada is slower than C, for > instance, unless you disable run-time checks (an Ada strength), It seems to me that a language that allows run-time array-bounds checking to be turned on or off, at the programmers whim, is clearly superior to a language that turns it on/off at language design time. >... and > even then Ada may still have extra features/overhead that C doesn't > have. That's true. Ada programs still have to store the array bounds in memory, even if array-bounds checking is turned off. >... Similarly, Lisp has features/overhead that Ada doesn't have, and > time (or space) penalties to go with them. True. - Bob