LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  April 1998

TEAM-ADA April 1998

Subject:

RE> compilation speed

From:

Mike Brenner <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Mike Brenner <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 9 Apr 1998 10:58:13 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (92 lines)

Pascal responded to the compilation speed with a list of times
to count:

   > conception time
   > writing time
   > compile time
   > debugging time
   > maintenance time

This is a good list. However, before adding up the weighted sums
(multiple the TIME by the number of times it will be done), one
additional time has to be added to the list:


   EXECUTION TIME


Some programs are executed more than once over their lifecycle
after they are written, though not most.

Most programs are throw away utilities, student programs,
prototypes, or the kind of programs that ask a query and
once the answer is gotten, they are thrown away.

However, the minority of programs (still a large number) is
intended to be executed many times, and their speed of
execution is the critical factor.

Ada has improved in all of these areas since its inception,
including in compilation time. This chart is for a computer
program with approximately 20,000 lines of code, according to
the SLOC of the Unquoted, Uncommented, Semicolon.

My notes show the following compilation times for MIMS with no optimization.

YEAR    TIME         CPU       MACHINE      (LOC/MIN)/MHZ

1982    18 hours     25 MHz    mainframe    2.4
1985    18 hours      6 MHz    PC 286       4.6
1993     2 hours     50 MHz    PC 486D      3.3
1997    40 minutes   90 MHz    Pentium I    5.5
1998     8 minutes  266 MHz    Pentium II   9.4

With full optimization (for gnat: -O3 and -gnatn):

1998    17 minutes  266 MHz    Pentium II   4.4

This indicates that the speed of compiling per MHZ has improved, but
that more of the compilation speed increase is due to increases
of MHz than is due to compilation technology.

A second thing this chart shows is that the two biggest leaps
were Alsys's decision to sell a 4 MHz board with their compiler
for the 80286 (which doubled the adjusted compile speed),
and gnat's decision to permit compilation in any order (which
also doubled the adjusted compilation speed).

The third thing this shows (horribile dictu!) is that after
adjusting for CPU speed, the time it took to compile on a
286 was only twice as slow as the most modern technology.
It would have been hard to convince me of that back in 1985,
as a user of Borland's Turbo Pascal environment which compiled
an equivalent number of lines of Pascal code in about 15 minutes,
two orders of magnitude faster.

Since more Free software is developed in C++ or Java right now,
that is what Ada compilation speed should be compared to. Ada seems
to be a little faster than most C++ compilers, but a quite a bit slower
than most Java compilers. However, the C++ does not as much
the compilation time and execution time error detection capability
that Ada gives. And neither has the concurrent programming capability
in the Ada language, so the Ada compiler is doing a lot more work.

However, it is fast enough on today's Pentium workstations and
Unix Personal Computers, that compilation speed  is NO LONGER AN ISSUE.

On the Ada wish list for Ada 2005X are some very minor error repairs
(already discussed on this list), a large amount of speed improvements
in generics (keep it static, and pass non-generics to generis), and
a third category: find even more bugs at compile time. This third
category will cost MORE compilation time: cross check more things,
generate EXTRA constraint checking code at parameter passing junctions,
catch uses of variables by multiple simltaneous objects, and pattern
recognize some of the common algorithmic design errors.

We are at a point where it is okay to request features that will cost MORE
compilation time, like keeping static variables across generic instantiations.
The speed issues from now on are how long does it take to RUN, and
how long does it take to MAINTAIN it.

Mike Brenner

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager