Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!purdue!umd5!mimsy!dday
From: dday@mimsy.UUCP (Dennis Doubleday)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: optimizating compilers (VMS ADA)
Message-ID: <10289@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 21 Jan 88 21:18:29 GMT
References: <8801201714.AA15107@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: dday@mimsy.UUCP (Dennis Doubleday)
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 21

In article <8801201714.AA15107@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> TENE@TECHMAX.BITNET writes:
>Once again, the VAX ADA compiler does NOT do these by default, ONLY
>when you ask it to optimize.
>...
>If you want such a program to work DON'T use an optimizer on it.
> The user made that promise when he compiled with
>an OPTIMIZE qualifier which is not the default...

I don't really think that this is a convincing argument.  I agree completely
with Mr. Cohen and Mr. Firth that an optimizer should not change the
meaning of a program.  To allow otherwise is to allow any sort of dubious
"optimization" that improves a program's time or space usage while
introducing unintended and unpredictable consequences.  In any event, Mr.
Tene, your claim is flatly wrong:  page A-21 of DEC's publication
"Developing Ada Programs on VAX VMS" says :
    "By default, the COMPILE command applies full optimimization..."
-- 
UUCP:	seismo!mimsy!dday                        Dennis Doubleday
CSNet:	dday@mimsy				 University of Maryland
ARPA:	dday@mimsy.umd.edu			 College Park, MD 20742
Fan of: Chicago Cubs, Chicago Bears, OU Sooners	 (301) 454-6154