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: 103376,76ec5d55630beb71 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-03 10:45:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.stealth.net news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada 200X Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 17:45:05 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <3EDC0BE6.42300129@somewhere.nil> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1054662305 7440 129.241.83.78 (3 Jun 2003 17:45:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 17:45:05 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38522 Date: 2003-06-03T17:45:05+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Preben Randhol writes: > >> Gautier Write-only wrote: >> > And838N@netscape.net wrote: >> > >> >> I've heard professors say they don't like Ada because it's slow and >> >> does all those "bounds" checking "things". >> > >> > They are misinformed: Ada is slow when the bounds checking is ON. >> >> Well I wouldn't say Ada is slow. I think C would be just as slow if it >> *had* bounds checking. > > Slower, actually, because C can't tell the difference between "pointer > to int" and "pointer to array of int", and would therefore have to store > extra information with every pointer, in general. So one could put the spin on it and say that Ada *is* faster because it has more efficient boundary checks than C. :-) At any rate I hope that the future will bring more software that has boundary check etc... so that the software is safe. Like having and using the seatbelt in your car. :-) -- Preben Randhol http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/