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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-10 01:26:07 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!colt.net!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pipehawk.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: john.mccabe@emrad.com.nospam (John McCabe) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: is Ada dying? Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 08:25:07 GMT Organization: Emrad Ltd Message-ID: <3bc403dc.1888765@news.demon.co.uk> References: <9prl5701m0v@drn.newsguy.com> <3bc16b42.3799903@news.demon.co.uk> <3BC20BC2.1F92FADB@adaworks.com> <3bc2b25a.1919900@news.demon.co.uk> <3BC3D6A9.DF42F428@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1002702319 nnrp-14:19073 NO-IDENT pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14124 Date: 2001-10-10T08:25:07+00:00 List-Id: On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 22:03:37 -0700, Richard Riehle wrote: >> Find me an Ada 95 compiler for a Mil-Std-1750A target then? > >Alas, there seems to be none. TLD was going to develop one, but >TLD seems to have vanished. Yes, they have - as the Irvine Compiler Corporation found to their cost by the sound of it - TLD apparently licensed ICC technology. I've used the TLD compiler a few times and can honestly say I was not impressed. >DDC-I is probably our last hope >for a 1750A compiler, but I don't think they have announced one, >so far. I haven't heard recently. They did an Ada83 one, and it was assumed that the ANDF technology they were supposed to be using for Ada 95 would mean Ada 95 would be possible for the 1750. >To be fair, many believe the 1750A is a dead processor. Under normal circumstances I believe the 1750A would have been dead years ago but, as it is one of very few processors available in Radiation Hardened form (at least it was around 4 years ago), its life appeared to have been extended and it was (is?) used extensively in the European space industry. >While this >may not be true, it seems the 1983 Ada standard serves quite well >for the kinds of programs being written for 1750A. In my limited >experience with this processor (one project only), the programs >don't use tasking, don't use access types, and often use only a >subset of the full range of language capabilities. There is no >need for inheritance, dynamic binding, or most other features >found in Ada 95. Those with experience on a larger number >of 1750A projects may have a different view. I don't see any reason why the 1750A should not be suitable for Ada 95 (except those built were all exceptionally slow compared to modern processors). For Ada 83 the fact that tasking wasn't used was often more a criticism on the speed of the processor and the compiler technology available at the time. The Ada Tasking Co-Processor (ATAC) was a piece of hardware designed to enhance the 1750's tasking capabilities, and operated as a kind of co-processor. I believe TLD added support to their compiler for the ATAC with funding supplied by ESA.