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-Thread: a07f3367d7,677963b1aa23e668
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:49:40 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What's stopping you from using Ada for your next commercial
 project?
References: 
 <fb3979d4-0335-474f-a62e-f71641969da8@p24g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
 <slrninem6k.66u.localhost@example.org> <il7o17$pco$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <bf400eb6-f4d3-4cbb-9d4f-3354f9ec693b@u3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <bf400eb6-f4d3-4cbb-9d4f-3354f9ec693b@u3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d78bad5$0$6991$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Mar 2011 12:49:41 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 3deebc45.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=:Oi80AKon3@@k=MdN::NBI4IUK<Cl32<A4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOKg<UoilM3kmHnc\616M64>JLh>_cHTX3jMlg3GA938IdH
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19008
Date: 2011-03-10T12:49:41+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 10.03.11 11:21, Gerd wrote:

> 4. Ada is not available for many of the processors that are used in
> embedded range (e.g. NEC 850, Infineon TriCore, or - still used - 8051/
> HC11), and if there would be an Ada compiler (in fact a complete tool
> chain is needed, including RT support for the bare board), then the
> costs are far beyond of what would be acceptable (see Green Hills fo
> example).

Is this true even if you go the SofCheck -> C(++) route
(which reportedly is being used actively with "safety certified"
being a requirement)?

Is it different for any language more advanced than assembly
language or C?