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,e3feb606f668a7c1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Stanley R. Allen" <Stanley_R_Allen@raytheon.com>
Subject: Re: Ada 95 based RTOS
Date: 2000/02/22
Message-ID: <38B2D4BC.4205DD06@raytheon.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 588489402
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <88ilp7$bcm$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38ADCA44.3B91BF6F@averstar.com>
 <88qli0$gvr$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38B2A2A1.FDCDDFE7@honeywell.com>
 <88ugrd$7j7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-02-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

xaplos@my-deja.com wrote:
> 
> I'm fairly new to the Ada language and have spent a lot of time reading
> how Ada is superior to C/C++ in design and safety. I'm currious if
> someone can explain why there are so many RTOS based on C/C++ and "none"
> (I mean easily and freely available) based on Ada. With Ada's real-time
> annex and other language features, one would think an Ada-based
> kernel/run-time would be superior to others.

How about:

    "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain"  -- Schiller

?

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen@raytheon.com