home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nnrp.info.ucla.edu!jmartin
- From: jmartin@cs.ucla.edu (Jay Martin)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
- Date: 12 Mar 1996 20:48:19 GMT
- Organization: University of California, Los Angeles
- Message-ID: <4i4nuj$f0i@saba.info.ucla.edu>
- References: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <1996Feb22.005518.13396@leeweyr.sccsi.com> <4gvrffINNlqo@anvil.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> <4h5hgj$vpd@tomquartz.niestu.com> <4h7jskINNnph@anvil.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> <313EDF38.61C1@lfwc.lockheed.com> <TANMOY.96Mar7180321@qcd.lanl.gov> <4i01hb$s6j@new-news.cc.brandeis.edu> <31457491.244A@lfwc.lockheed.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: may.cs.ucla.edu
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0.b3.0 #9 (NOV)
-
- Ken Garlington <GarlingtonKE@lfwc.lockheed.com> writes:
-
- >dernis@binah.cc.brandeis.edu wrote:
-
- >> It would seem to me
- >> that any language which incorporates range checking, bound
- >> checking, garbage collection, etc. from the get go loses the
- >> flexibility of higher performance in critical areas.
-
- >With respect to checking, you might be right - for those languages that
- >don't permit the suppression of run-time checks for those _critical_ areas.
- >Fortunately, Ada permits check suppression.
-
- This whole "checks" issue is just ignorance. Has their ever been a
- mature production quality optimizing compiler for ANY imperative
- language that did not have an option for check suppression?
-
-