billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (03/14/90)
From hammondr@sunroof.crd.ge.com (Richard A Hammond):
> [some comments regarding the Dhrystone benchmark for Ada vs. C]
The comments on that issue were:
it is widely used in spite of its minor flaws. One
of the reasons for using it was that numerous C compilers
have been benchmarked with it and the results have been
published and are readily available for comparison.
(Note: Followups and continued discussion to comp.lang.misc...)
Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (03/14/90)
From grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mike Percy): > Yawn...and maybe when I get back from lunch my [Ada] compile will be done. > "All I did was correct a misspelling in a comment in the linked-list > package specification..." Ooops. When you submit a program unit for compilation, the compiler has to assume that if all you wanted was to change a comment and get a compiler listing, you would have had the sense to do the compilation in a temporary program library rather than recompile a fundamental specification and thereby invalidate everything (probably the entire software system) that was compiled against that particular specification. If you had changed something substantive, then the recompilation would be necessary in order to propagate the effects of the change throughout the system. It would have to be a fundamental semantic or syntactic change, since if it were merely an implementation detail the effects would have been confined to the package body. (Followups to comp.lang.misc...) Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu