Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language)

From: Marin David Condic (nobody_at_noplace.com)
Date: 02/10/04 

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:52:48 GMT

MSG wrote:
> 3. not very performance demanding (don't know about other compilers,
> but they say GNAT produces slow executables)
>
I don't know how this comes up - I've used Gnat for non-realtime code
and found its performance to be as good as most other languages compiled
for PCs or workstations. It is, after all, just a different front end to
the gcc compiler and so the code generation is as good as for Gnu C and
the other languages it supports. (As always, you need to know how to use
the compiler to get optimal results. That's true no matter what language
you're talking about.)

BTW: I use Ada all the time for hard real time systems and its
performance is as good or better than other languages routinely used to
do similar jobs. I have very demanding timing requirements and very old,
slow processors. If you get a good quality embedded Ada compiler, it
works just fine. The "language" can't be slow if good quality
implementations exist to prove the opposite.

So before you go reacting to rumors, I'd suggest you actually look at
some facts about Ada. You might even get yourself some benchmark
algorithms and test it out. That would be the scientific thing to do.
Believing in unsubstantiated rumors is a little like believing in
fairies & pixies because you heard someone tell a story about them.

MDC 

-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm
Send Replies To: m   o   d   c @ a   m   o   g
                    c   n   i       c   .   r
     "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat.
     Its the FAT that makes you look fat."
         --  Al Bundy
======================================================================

Relevant Pages