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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.180.187.238 with SMTP id fv14mr20948581wic.0.1373419874195; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:31:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.77.78 with SMTP id q14mr1506070igw.2.1373419873847; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Path: border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cw2no10425126wib.0!news-out.google.com!md6ni51750wic.0!nntp.google.com!t19no951218qam.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 18:31:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=108.90.156.221; posting-account=qZVz2QoAAAAN9WxYp-9jYb7jORc4Zqwt NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.90.156.221 References: <8a3093bb-90b3-4081-9b0b-dfde5aa6b851@googlegroups.com> <993despcuk1d.1ifczvyo501px.dlg@40tude.net> <04244d3e-2a29-4980-b7a1-0dad4569caa2@googlegroups.com> <1czx18gollwt5$.n1wi7pmd0bqh$.dlg@40tude.net> <81c8e4a2-f0bb-4559-b2b7-0eba08ddca99@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4be25699-a21d-42f9-b44a-38631e866357@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Point a beginner in the right direction? Cheap bare-board to run with a RTOS for running ADA From: mjsilva@scriptoriumdesigns.com Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:31:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Original-Bytes: 4622 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:182410 Date: 2013-07-09T18:31:13-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 1:10:19 PM UTC-7, Randy Brukardt wrote: > wrote in message > > news:81c8e4a2-f0bb-4559-b2b7-0eba08ddca99@googlegroups.com... > > On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 12:51:39 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > > ... > > > No technology ever dies, it becomes niche. Ada's advantage in the niche is > > > > > > minimal. Its advantage on mainstream SBCs is potentially huge. > > > > >But the difference is that nobody is arguing that Ada is not suitable for > > >SBCs. However, > > > you are dismissing Ada on microcontrollers, of which tens of billions are > > > sold each year > > > (big niche!). You are making this an either/or question, which it most > > > certainly is not. How > > > is it that you have been appointed to determine where Ada can be > > > beneficial, and where > > > it cannot? > > > > He hasn't, he's just telling the truth. On tiny systems What is tiny? 128k of program memory? 256k? 512k? 1MByte? > 90% of Ada's > > advantages are negated; What is the absolute minimum system that can run "100% Ada"? > you're talking about systems with no exceptions, > > extremely limited tasking (Ravenscar is far too limited to be usable outside > > of the hands of experts with lots of time to spend on analysis), very > > limited numerics (usually integers only) Why integers only? Surely Ada compilers don't use OS services for floating or fixed point. >and that by their very nature have > > to be small (so the benefit of Ada's program structuring features like > > private types and child packages are hardly noticable, except in a negative > > way as they often will slightly increase code size). > > > > Such a language is completely different than the Ada I know, and it's > > dubious to call it Ada at all. Moreover, the advantages it still has are > > impossible to explain to someone that is using some other high-level > > language -- most of the code written would end up as C-in-Ada-syntax and the > > programmers would never find out why that is bad (because it wouldn't matter > > on those systems). > > > > The truth is, you don't *need* Ada to program such systems, and on such > > systems it's "just another programming language", especially from the > > perspective of the average programmer (as opposed to the Ada true believer). > > It wouldn't cause the sort of correctness improvements that you see when > > using Ada on larger systems, so it hard to see why people would pay extra > > for it. And if no one wants to pay for it, it isn't going to exist (almost > > all great Open Source software has its roots in for-pay companys). And yet somebody paid for Ada on AVR, a much smaller processor than what is being discussed here. So again I ask you and Dmitry, what is the smallest possible system that can run "100% Ada"?