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 10:24:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada 200X Date: 03 Jun 2003 13:24:02 -0400 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: <3EDC0BE6.42300129@somewhere.nil> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1054661042 2057 199.172.62.241 (3 Jun 2003 17:24:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 17:24:02 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38516 Date: 2003-06-03T13:24:02-04:00 List-Id: 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. - Bob