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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3ca574fc2007430
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ken Garlington <garlingtonke@lmtas.lmco.com>
Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry
Date: 1996/11/13
Message-ID: <328A0809.1312@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 196311628
references: <1996Nov12.192850.16867@ole.cdac.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
Date: 1996-11-13T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


James Thiele wrote:
> 
> Originally C was designed around PDP-11 class machines: 16 bits,
> multiple registers, indirect addressing modes, etc.  Since gcc has
> to dumb down C for an 8-bit machine, how much would GNAT have
> to dumb down Ada to target an 8051?  Would you still think it was Ada?

I would, since I should still be able to use:

 * Strong typing
 * Generics (at least in a limited sense)
 * Packages
 * Standard interrupt handling mechanisms (maybe even tasks, with a lot of restrictions)
 * and probably more

I might not be able to use tasking. I might not even be able to have
reentrant code. But I would still have something pretty powerful.

> 
> Just my 2 cents.

And here's your change. :)

> 
> --
> James Thiele
> james@cdac.com (work) or jet@eskimo.com (home)
> http://www.eskimo.com/~jet

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"
For more info, see http://www.lmtas.com or http://www.lmco.com