In article <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org (Zeisel Helmut) writes: > In article <383299F6.20F1E87F@nortelnetworks.com>, "P.G.Hamer" <P.G.Hamer@nortelnetworks.com> writes: > > Zeisel Helmut wrote: > > > >> Is there much numerical analysis done in ADA? > >> Could it be (at least in theory) an alternative to Fortran? > >> Are there any serios performance measurments? > >> Are there similiar problems like the aliasing problem in C/C++? > > > >I think that the usual rule applies. Look to see what language people > >adressing the same sort of problems as you have are using. Look to > >see what the big mathematical library developers are using (eg see > >netlib http://www.netlib.org & statlib http://lib.stat.cmu.edu/). > > I checked, and clearly I did not find much. > I found something following the links > in www.adahome.com. > > > >Find > >out > >about compiler choice, availability, price, and performance in your > >sort of application. > > > > At the moment, my interest is only a theoretic one. > AFAIK, ADA was designed as a general purpose language > that should also cover numerical analysis. > Why is it not used for that purpose? > Is it just because it has not (yet) reached the critical mass of programmers > or are there some "principal flaws" in the language > that make ADA unusable for numerical analysis? > > Helmut > > > > -- > >
I was using Ada for numerical analysis. I recently stopped that, since I could not find an Ada compiler for a MPP (Cray T3E) that I have access to. Actually this is a shame, since MPP's should be programmed with the tasking constructs that Ada provides. Also, I could not find an Ada Compiler for Linux on an Alpha-AXP. There is GNAT for Alpha-OSF1, but I could not manage to port it myself to the Linux-Alpha. So, in my case, I do not use Ada any longer because of lack of compilers.