From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ed8f3214da27f90,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-02-27 16:31:32 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!stern.fokus.gmd.de!ceres.fokus.gmd.de!zib-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!zrz.TU-Berlin.DE!netmbx.de!unlisys!news.maz.net!news.ppp.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!butch!rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com!rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com!gamache From: gamache@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Assembler to Ada Reverse Ratio o Date: 27 Feb 95 19:31:32 -500 Organization: Lockheed Sanders, Inc. Message-ID: <1995Feb27.193132.1@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dune.sanders.lockheed.com Date: 1995-02-27T19:31:32-05:00 List-Id: I'm working another assignment, so naturally I have another question to which I am again, shall we say, clueless. ;-) Here goes: If I have some existing legacy code in assembler, there seems to be some intuitive relationship between that existing code and code that performs the same function written in Ada. This intuition is derived (at least for me) from the expansion ratio between Ada and assembler. (This ratio is not only complier/target dependent; but also it is application dependent) OK. Is there any emperical data on what this reverse relationship (from legacy code to Ada) would be? Before any "good design" folks even get a chance - I am not considering simple recode of the existing code. I'm simply trying to scope the size of the Ada effort. This effort will (with almost certainty) create a design that is different from the assembler one. But at that time the ratio I seek will be easily calculatable. adTHANKSvance --------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Gamache Lockheed Sanders