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: 103376,3a1c64628a09855b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr13.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!cfe18fef!not-for-mail From: Gary Scott Organization: Home User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Lack of formal syntax undermines Ada References: <480102d3$0$19814$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.94.3.156 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr13.news.prodigy.net 1208043165 ST000 68.94.3.156 (Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:32:45 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:32:45 EDT X-UserInfo1: TSU[@I_A\S@]RV@[WBHB^WHAAJYFBL@MAHU^_BAMEH]TCDYG^WHKAH_[JTXDX_KI\VB]JBVMS^YT_G[CZVWAOS\DHFWEH]@KGXYHB\_CMDSFABP^J[AHHRKARLE_JDBLJ\XA[JRMEI]MGJSPB\Y]^KG\@S^@VQKI_Q[G@@_ACSARASDEFLBJ]S\GFNTUAVBL Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:32:45 GMT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20903 Date: 2008-04-12T23:32:45+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Gary Scott writes: > > >>So there's no possibility of the optimizer making assumptions it >>shouldn't and "simplifying something"? > > > Not sure what you mean. Can you give an example of such > an assumption? > > - Bob In some languages that have pure functions, the compiler is free to not execute the function call if it can determine the return value by other means and so eliminate the code entirely (nor inline it). I was thinking thinking there might be situations where a C procedure call might be optimized away based upon assumptions of purity (pureness?). Probably an outdated question based upon recent posts. -- Gary Scott mailto:garylscott@sbcglobal dot net Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org -OR- Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done. -- Henry Ford