Re: Why should hackers love Ada. (Re: Ada 95 based RTOS)

["Marin D. Condic" <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com>]

Gary Scott wrote:
> This is a good feature, but many other languages have similar features (some very old like Jovial and PL/1).
> In other languages, my experience is that you simply define pack/unpack/scale routines and write the main
> executive and high-level functionality in a high-level fashion (possibly OO) and simply invoke these low-level
> "reformat" routines at the top and bottom of the frame (or as-required).  Then again, I'm also used to being
> able to embed assembly to gain access to an interval timer or generate an interrupt right into the high-level
> language code.
> 
There are lots of languages that give you good control of the underlying
representation of data and access to the hardware. Jovial was better
than most in this respect. However, I think there is a difference
between Ada and other languages in this respect. Ada tends towards
encouraging encapsulation of the low-level features so that they exist
in an isolated spot, whereas other languages treat access to low level
features as the "normal" mode of writing code. For example, you mention
embedded assembly. Ada will let you do that but you have to isolate it
in a subprogram - you can't just stick assembler instructions anywhere
you feel like.

MDC
-- 
=============================================================
Marin David Condic   - Quadrus Corporation -   1.800.555.3393
1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
http://www.quadruscorp.com/
m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m

***PLEASE REMOVE THE "-NOSPAM" PART OF MY RETURN ADDRESS***

Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"Because that's where they keep the money."
    --  Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks. 
=============================================================