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: 103376,32cfbb718858528b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-07 12:48:56 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Commercial C To Ada 95 compiler Date: 7 Jun 2002 12:48:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <4519e058.0206071148.9b87acf@posting.google.com> References: <3D002D11.CC706952@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.115.221.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1023479336 1522 127.0.0.1 (7 Jun 2002 19:48:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jun 2002 19:48:56 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25472 Date: 2002-06-07T19:48:56+00:00 List-Id: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote in message news:... > In article <3D002D11.CC706952@adaworks.com>, Richard Riehle writes: > > Henrik Quintel wrote: > > > >> does someone knows an ANSI C to Ada 95 compiler (commercial)? > >> The compiler has to translate C header and C body files. > > > > This idea, if you will forgive my being blunt, makes absolutely > > no sense at all. > > It might make sense in a mythical future when product liability laws > discouraged vendors from selling C compilers :-) :-) The only problem with that is that the translation would have to be just as unsafe for it to be a valid translation of C. Think lots of integers, floats, unchecked_conversions, and "pragma Suppress (All_Checks);"s. Absolutely no good would come from such a translation, unless you happened to need to use a platform that has an Ada compiler and no C compiler. You could try to refactor it afterwards, I suppose. But it would probably be easier to do so straight from the original C. On the other hand, it might make sense if we added to your universe: software developers who believe touching raw C code leaves them ritually unclean. Running the C through a tool has got to be cheaper than hiring some software monk like Grady Booch to come in and perform some kind of cleansing ceremony on your whole software development environment. Plus, there's that 7 day waiting period, not to mention that getting computers to run again after being immersed in mikvah is a bitch. :-) -- T.E.D. Home - mailto:dennison@telepath.com (Yahoo: Ted_Dennison) Homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html