Re: About ADA...

Re: About ADA...

[David Botton]

Pascal to Ada Translator

http://p2ada.sourceforge.net/

Good luck
David Botton

Re: About ADA...

[miloslav.raus]

2015/10/21 21:24:09 UTC+2 Ramine wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> Ladies and gentlemen, i have looked carefully to ADA,
> it is a nice programming language, but i have to be frank, the 
> ......


It might be the language barrier, but should what you have written be understood as:

1) you seriously expect that by implementing something in one language it should auto-magically translate itself to all other languages.

2) communities of (all|selected) prog. langs should observe everything you do  instantly port everything you publish.

3) something entirely else (please do elaborate) 

I'm just baffled ...

About Ada

[Adrian Hoe]

Thought you may be interested in this link:

http://www.realtimearts.net/rt52/sosbos_ada.html

Enjoy reading.
-- 
Adrian Hoe
http://adrianhoe.com

About Ada...

[Spiffy1two]

I've been programming in Basic for a while, and now I'm trying to learn Turbo
Pascal.  What is Ada?  It's the military's official programming language,
right?  But are there any advantages to learning Ada over other languages?  Are
most of you just Army Programmers? :)         Sorry if I make myself sound
stupid in this message but it's kind of hard writing a message about something
you know nothing about...

Re: About Ada...

[Matthew Heaney]

In article <19971130215101.QAA07721@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
spiffy1two@aol.com (Spiffy1two) wrote:

>I've been programming in Basic for a while, and now I'm trying to learn Turbo
>Pascal.  What is Ada?

Ada is the language of choice for building large, safety-critical systems. 
In fact, Ada is the only internationally standardized object-oriented
programming language (though I understand the draft ISO C++ standard was
recently accepted).  You can get lots of info at the Ada home page.

<http://www.adahome.com/>

You can get a free, high-quality compiler, called GNAT, available on many
platforms.  

<http://www.gnat.com/>
<ftp://ftp.cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat/>

>It's the military's official programming language, right?

More like unofficial language.  It used to be the case, when the Ada
Mandate was in effect, that warfighting systems had to be built using Ada,
unless accompanied by a waiver.  The current policy is to select a
programming language in the context of a defined, systems engineering
process.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that only military contractors use
Ada.  Quite the contrary.  Many commercial shops use Ada, and Ada is the
language of choice for railroad control, air traffic control, and other
domains that have safety-critical requirements.  For example, the new
Boeing 777 is an all-Ada plane.  The Ada home has a list of organizations
using Ada.

>But are there any advantages to learning Ada over other languages?  Are
>most of you just Army Programmers? :)  

This programmer is decidedly NOT an "army programmer." :-)  I use Ada by
choice, because it is the best technology available for writing real-time
embedded systems.

Although it is based on Pascal, it definately is NOT Pascal.  It fixed the
idiosyncrasies in that language, and extended it by adding support for
programming-in-the-large, concurrency, and low-level programming.

Learning a language isn't a zero-sum game, either.  Just because you learn
Ada doesn't mean you can't learn other languages too!  Learn Ada and other
languages, and you'll prove to yourself that it's better.

Basically, if you'd rather get your work done, instead of spending all day
in front of a debugger, then use Ada!  And the compiler's free, so what are
you waiting for?

>Sorry if I make myself sound
>stupid in this message but it's kind of hard writing a message about something
>you know nothing about...

There's no such thing as a dumb question.  At least you approach new
technology with an open mind.  For too many programmers dismiss what they
don't understand.  You're willing to learn, which puts you light-years
ahead of others!

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271

Re: About Ada...

[John Apa]

Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777. And
I believe that extends to the Airbus world also.

John

Re: About Ada...

[Arthur Evans Jr]

In article <677hcg$s04@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>,
"John Apa" <wy.hunter@mailexcite.com> wrote:

> Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777.

Are you sure of this fact?  I find it highly unlikely.  Many aircraft
Boeing still delivers were developed long before Ada was considered a
practical solution -- or even before Ada existed.  As rewriting in Ada
would require new FAA certification, a daunting obstacle, I find it hard
to believe that anyone would have done such an upgrade.

Please check your facts and repost.

Art Evans

Arthur Evans Jr, PhD
Ada Consulting
evans@evans.pgh.pa.us

Re: About Ada...

[John Apa]

I'm sure sorry if I threatened your belief system, but since I work for the
company that does the work for most of Boeing's AC I think I can safely
make that assertion. The 777, 737, 747-400, V-22, and CH-47 all run on a
diet of Ada. New planes ship with Ada, and the retrofit market is mostly
Ada also. The guis are c or VAPs. We have hundreds of Ada engineers working
on Boeing, and even Airbus, products. So start believing.

I'm currently developing under DO-178B (in Ada95 even!), the FAA's new
standard for flight software. It's very daunting, but most new software has
to be recertified anyway so having it in Ada isn't a big deal. Much of the
earlier (pre-84) SW was written in PL/1 and was ported to Ada. No, not the
best plan, but that's how we got to where we are. Much of the code has been
redesigned since then in Ada.

You sound like you're stating that it'd be harder to certify with Ada than
anything else, that's just plain false. It also sounds like you're stating
that planes are never upgraded to more recent flight management/control
systems, wrong again. Airframes are around for quite a while and in this
market at least they are upgraded to increase safety and efficiency. Both
noble causes.

The FAA and world authorities are coming out with new regs for flying and
that means better avionics are required to keep everyone safe. Something I
strongly believe in when I'm at 30K Feet.

You could have checked these facts too, it's certainly not a secret. I
posted this information informally to show that Ada is not just a military
language. It is being accepted commercially where safety and reliability
are critical.

Please check your beliefs and repost.
John Apa



Arthur Evans Jr <evans@evans.pgh.pa.us> wrote in article
<evans-1712970812050001@ppp21.s8.pgh.net>...
> In article <677hcg$s04@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>,
> "John Apa" <wy.hunter@mailexcite.com> wrote:
> 
> > Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777.
> 
> Are you sure of this fact?  I find it highly unlikely.  Many aircraft
> Boeing still delivers were developed long before Ada was considered a
> practical solution -- or even before Ada existed.  As rewriting in Ada
> would require new FAA certification, a daunting obstacle, I find it hard
> to believe that anyone would have done such an upgrade.
> 
> Please check your facts and repost.
> 
> Art Evans
> 
> Arthur Evans Jr, PhD
> Ada Consulting
> evans@evans.pgh.pa.us
> 

Re: About Ada...

[Paul H. Whittington]

John can you give any comparisons regarding development and
maintenance, in terms of cost and time to market, between Ada
and any alternatives that have been attempted?


John Apa wrote:

> I'm sure sorry if I threatened your belief system, but since I work for the
> company that does the work for most of Boeing's AC I think I can safely
> make that assertion. The 777, 737, 747-400, V-22, and CH-47 all run on a
> diet of Ada. New planes ship with Ada, and the retrofit market is mostly
> Ada also. The guis are c or VAPs. We have hundreds of Ada engineers working
> on Boeing, and even Airbus, products. So start believing.
>
> I'm currently developing under DO-178B (in Ada95 even!), the FAA's new
> standard for flight software. It's very daunting, but most new software has
> to be recertified anyway so having it in Ada isn't a big deal. Much of the
> earlier (pre-84) SW was written in PL/1 and was ported to Ada. No, not the
> best plan, but that's how we got to where we are. Much of the code has been
> redesigned since then in Ada.
>
> You sound like you're stating that it'd be harder to certify with Ada than
> anything else, that's just plain false. It also sounds like you're stating
> that planes are never upgraded to more recent flight management/control
> systems, wrong again. Airframes are around for quite a while and in this
> market at least they are upgraded to increase safety and efficiency. Both
> noble causes.
>
> The FAA and world authorities are coming out with new regs for flying and
> that means better avionics are required to keep everyone safe. Something I
> strongly believe in when I'm at 30K Feet.
>
> You could have checked these facts too, it's certainly not a secret. I
> posted this information informally to show that Ada is not just a military
> language. It is being accepted commercially where safety and reliability
> are critical.
>
> Please check your beliefs and repost.
> John Apa
>
> Arthur Evans Jr <evans@evans.pgh.pa.us> wrote in article
> <evans-1712970812050001@ppp21.s8.pgh.net>...
> > In article <677hcg$s04@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "John Apa" <wy.hunter@mailexcite.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777.
> >
> > Are you sure of this fact?  I find it highly unlikely.  Many aircraft
> > Boeing still delivers were developed long before Ada was considered a
> > practical solution -- or even before Ada existed.  As rewriting in Ada
> > would require new FAA certification, a daunting obstacle, I find it hard
> > to believe that anyone would have done such an upgrade.
> >
> > Please check your facts and repost.
> >
> > Art Evans
> >
> > Arthur Evans Jr, PhD
> > Ada Consulting
> > evans@evans.pgh.pa.us
> >

Re: About Ada...

[John Apa]

As far as I know we've only done Ada so there's not much comparison. Some
is being done by other divisions but it's not a major part of the market
place at this point. Ada works very well, and is being bid for all future
projects with the exception being GUI's and the like which are usually c.
The ada tools are out that and they are improving in quality and number
everyday. The only real comparison that I know of is the one done by the VP
at Rational and available at their web site. It compares the cost of their
tool development in both c and ada with the same teams, very enlightening.

Paul H. Whittington <paul@srv.net> wrote in article
<3498B3C8.432910F9@srv.net>...
> John can you give any comparisons regarding development and
> maintenance, in terms of cost and time to market, between Ada
> and any alternatives that have been attempted?
> 
> 
> John Apa wrote:
> 
> > I'm sure sorry if I threatened your belief system, but since I work for
the
> > company that does the work for most of Boeing's AC I think I can safely
> > make that assertion. The 777, 737, 747-400, V-22, and CH-47 all run on
a
> > diet of Ada. New planes ship with Ada, and the retrofit market is
mostly
> > Ada also. The guis are c or VAPs. We have hundreds of Ada engineers
working
> > on Boeing, and even Airbus, products. So start believing.
> >
> > I'm currently developing under DO-178B (in Ada95 even!), the FAA's new
> > standard for flight software. It's very daunting, but most new software
has
> > to be recertified anyway so having it in Ada isn't a big deal. Much of
the
> > earlier (pre-84) SW was written in PL/1 and was ported to Ada. No, not
the
> > best plan, but that's how we got to where we are. Much of the code has
been
> > redesigned since then in Ada.
> >
> > You sound like you're stating that it'd be harder to certify with Ada
than
> > anything else, that's just plain false. It also sounds like you're
stating
> > that planes are never upgraded to more recent flight management/control
> > systems, wrong again. Airframes are around for quite a while and in
this
> > market at least they are upgraded to increase safety and efficiency.
Both
> > noble causes.
> >
> > The FAA and world authorities are coming out with new regs for flying
and
> > that means better avionics are required to keep everyone safe.
Something I
> > strongly believe in when I'm at 30K Feet.
> >
> > You could have checked these facts too, it's certainly not a secret. I
> > posted this information informally to show that Ada is not just a
military
> > language. It is being accepted commercially where safety and
reliability
> > are critical.
> >
> > Please check your beliefs and repost.
> > John Apa
> >
> > Arthur Evans Jr <evans@evans.pgh.pa.us> wrote in article
> > <evans-1712970812050001@ppp21.s8.pgh.net>...
> > > In article <677hcg$s04@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>,
> > > "John Apa" <wy.hunter@mailexcite.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the
777.
> > >
> > > Are you sure of this fact?  I find it highly unlikely.  Many aircraft
> > > Boeing still delivers were developed long before Ada was considered a
> > > practical solution -- or even before Ada existed.  As rewriting in
Ada
> > > would require new FAA certification, a daunting obstacle, I find it
hard
> > > to believe that anyone would have done such an upgrade.
> > >
> > > Please check your facts and repost.
> > >
> > > Art Evans
> > >
> > > Arthur Evans Jr, PhD
> > > Ada Consulting
> > > evans@evans.pgh.pa.us
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: About Ada...

[Peter Hermann]

John Apa (wolfmountainranch@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
> Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777. And
> I believe that extends to the Airbus world also.

Having in mind a recent speech of an Airbus manager displaying
his level of intelligence in a German TV interview I have my doubts.

--
Peter Hermann  Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)

Re: About Ada...

[Robert S. White]

In article <67bijm$d3a@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>, 
ica2ph@alpha1.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de says...
>
>John Apa (wolfmountainranch@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
>> Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777. And
>> I believe that extends to the Airbus world also.
>
>Having in mind a recent speech of an Airbus manager displaying
>his level of intelligence in a German TV interview I have my doubts.

  I think John's point is that the major manufacturers of avionics 
for the commercial air transport market use Ada now and have used
Ada for the last ten years in all new products.  Since I suspect 
(thanks to deja news) that he works for a different company than I,
that would make at least two out of the biggest three avionics
companies in the world.  Haven't seen postings from anyone from
the third company.
_____________________________________________________________________
Robert S. White         -- An embedded systems software engineer
e-mail reply to reverse of: ia us lib cedar-rapids crpl shift2 whiter

Re: About Ada...

[Ralph Paul]

Robert S. White wrote:
> 
> In article <67bijm$d3a@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>,
> ica2ph@alpha1.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de says...
> >
> >John Apa (wolfmountainranch@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
> >> Ada is used on almost every AC that Boeing delivers, not just the 777. And
> >> I believe that extends to the Airbus world also.
> >
> >Having in mind a recent speech of an Airbus manager displaying
> >his level of intelligence in a German TV interview I have my doubts.
> 
>   I think John's point is that the major manufacturers of avionics
> for the commercial air transport market use Ada now and have used
> Ada for the last ten years in all new products.  Since I suspect
> (thanks to deja news) that he works for a different company than I,
> that would make at least two out of the biggest three avionics
> companies in the world.  Haven't seen postings from anyone from
> the third company.

Coming from a european "high performance aircraft" point of view, I can
say Ada has even replaced older languages in the last years and at least
on the
techincal side of things there is no change of this trend insight.
Actually the 
Ada minded people are having an easier time now because 
a.) compilers have become more reliable and performant
b.) experince in implementing real time has shown the benefits of Ada
c.) the systems have become alot more complex 

For example the X-31 flight control system was done in Jovial. However
if the
program should ever be reactivated it is very likely that the fcs will
be done in
Ada.

Ralph Paul

	repaul@ibm.net
	(FCS engineer)