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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f849b,b8d52151b7b306d2 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a00006d3c4735d70 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-30 10:31:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3FF1B8F9.6BDC73FF@yahoo.com> From: CBFalconer Reply-To: cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net Organization: Ched Research X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.arch.embedded,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Certified C compilers for safety-critical embedded systems References: <3fe00b82.90228601@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <3FE026A8.3CD6A3A@yahoo.com> <3bf1uvg2ntadvahfud2rg6ujk24sora6gr@4ax.com> <2u3auvogde8ktotlaq0ldiaska3g416gus@4ax.com> <20619edc.0312221020.3fd1b4ee@posting.google.com> <20619edc.0312222106.3b369547@posting.google.com> <45cs9hAbLc6$EAAx@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> <3fe9f0d7.104475725@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <5802069.JsgInS3tXa@linux1.krischik.com> <1072464162.325936@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1563361.SfB03k3vvC@linux1.krischik.com> <11LvOkBBXw7$EAJw@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> <3ff0687f.528387944@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <1086072.fFeiH4ICbz@linux1.krischik.com> <3ff18d4d.603356952@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <1731094.1f7Irsyk1h@linux1.krischik.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:31:05 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.76.137.43 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1072809065 12.76.137.43 (Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:31:05 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:31:05 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.arch.embedded:6371 comp.lang.ada:3960 Date: 2003-12-30T18:31:05+00:00 List-Id: Martin Krischik wrote: > ... snip ... > > The claim here in the group is that by use of a static analysis > tool the C code can be made as secure as the Ada code. I don't think anyone knowledgeable is seriously making such a claim. However, nobody knowledgeable would make the claim that assembly language is unnecessary either, and similarly C is extremely useful as a lingua franca extending over many systems. As has been pointed out elsethread, it is possible to translate Ada to C, which immediately takes advantage of the de facto portability, but gives up some compile time efficiency and convenience. After all, the usual function of a C compiler is to translate a C program to assembly language, except that that destination is not standardized. Implementation of run-time checks may require that the C code make extensive use of system subroutines. It may not be possible to use "a = b + c;" statements. At the same time the full C library is probably not needed, and can be heavily pruned for Ada use. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net) Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. USE worldnet address!