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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,cec20777e0d41ea0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-24 13:42:42 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!falcon.america.net!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!freenix!jussieu.fr!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!200-221-14-196.dsl-sp.uol.com.BR!not-for-mail From: Cesar Rabak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Increased Interest In Ada? Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 18:40:11 -0300 Message-ID: <3A982A3B.6CA8D07@uol.com.br> References: <3A82EFA2.C8756B09@acm.org> <970ma1$1l7$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9719vr$8a2$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3A95EDF6.8A132FE3@uol.com.br> <975uso$qae$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 200-221-14-196.dsl-sp.uol.com.br (200.221.14.196) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 983050798 24787469 200.221.14.196 (16 [39218]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5517 Date: 2001-02-24T18:40:11-03:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > > I disagree, but see below. > > > You disagree? Does this mean you know of a good Ada compiler targeted to an > inexpensive SBC that would fit the description? Or are you saying that > porting an Ada compiler to some SBC would be no big deal? In either case, > I'd definitely like to challenge you to verify this through demonstration. > :-) OK. I'll elaborate! I don't know of any good Ada compiler targeted to inexpensive SBC or LCDS. As already posted elsewhere in this thread, I second the position that perhaps porting is not the principal problem, but rather to assemble all the pieces, including a targeted tutorial (with exercises), etc. So perhaps we agree in the factual observation, and my disagreeing is more in the sizing of the opportunity. > > > Well the world has become a lot bigger than 8 bit microcontrollers. Agreed. But you see 32 bits processors abundant in kits designed for instructional use? >I am > currently working with a box that has a MIPS processor and almost the whole > system on a single chip. So a 32-bit processor able to control some > physical/electrical devices from a single board at an inexpensive price is > not at all out of the question. The problem is: Which One? This is an interesting question! It had to be inexpensive with abundant (and perhaps free) documentation available, and if possible a chip which people would feel it is worthwhile to expend time on it. >If you are > familiar with embedded systems, I'm sure you know that there just aren't > thousands of Ada ports out there for popular boards/development kits. You > need the compiler, plus a good, powerful linker & cross-target debugger > along with probably some available libraries, bootstrap code, descent > documentation of everything, etc. Saying "Well GNAT has a port to chip X > available somewhere on the net..." is interesting, but if you don't have all > the pieces pulled together into a nicely integrated package that works > reliably, it wouldn't make a good student environment. (It's hard enough for > the pros to figure out how to get this sort of thing to work - how much > harder would it be for the neophytes? :-) Second in full. > > I'm always interested in hearing ideas on this topic if you have any. > Thanks. I think a way to reduce the 'initial' cost of a such project would be to detect the 20% of board/kits which have the 80% of the "market" and have the ports (with all the provisos above mentioned) funded. On a second but necessarily concurrent front, we need to create a mind share in users/instructors/industry about the use of Ada for embedded systems. Otherwise, I feel the whole exercise will doomed. Cesar