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: 1014db,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-12 07:50:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsr1.ipcore.viaginterkom.de!btnet-peer1!btnet-feed3!btnet!carbon.eu.sun.com!new-usenet.uk.sun.com!not-for-mail From: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen 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) Date: 12 Feb 2004 16:37:00 +0100 Organization: Sun Microsystems 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: europa2.norway.sun.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: new-usenet.uk.sun.com 1076600222 1055 129.159.113.162 (12 Feb 2004 15:37:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@new-usenet.uk.sun.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Feb 2004 15:37:02 GMT User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5488 comp.lang.c:22107 comp.lang.c++:18899 comp.lang.java:2879 Date: 2004-02-12T15:37:02+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic writes: > Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote: > > > > Yes, but there are some caveats. Ada insists on getting floating point > > arithmetic "right", so it will typically do it differently than C, > > even though the Ada and C programs superficially look the same. For > > > Well, I *did* say that only if you had similarly coded examples could > you hope to do any comparison. Not that you couldn't do a comparison > and see a difference. ;-) > > Secondly, one needs to insist that some code under evaluation must > produce a *correct* result. If a C coded example computes the wrong > answer at twice the speed of a similar Ada example that gets the > answer right, is it even worth discussing? > It could well be. In the case of an interactive raytracer, minor numerical errors does not really matter if you can get the results at twice the speed. I imagine you can find other applications with similar characteristics. But in general, I agree that for the majority of applications the difference in speed between languages and compilers is nothing to worry about. -- C++: The power, elegance and simplicity of a hand grenade.