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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac31ec0a3cebb176
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ada2001 <ada2001@my-dejanews.com>
Subject: GNORT question (was Re: Are un-validated compilers unsafe?)
Date: 1999/04/27
Message-ID: <7g4uml$6u8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 471538444
References: <Xnu2xLAvVwI3EwFv@tioman.demon.co.uk>
 <7fv6cc$5eh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x6.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.175.225.22
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Apr 27 18:12:42 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.08 [en] (WinNT; I)
Date: 1999-04-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <7fv6cc$5eh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> wrote:

> For GNAT, we have a product GNORT that has no run time
> at all. Again it is a small subset (the inspiration for
> the subset is the SPARK language from Praxis). A nice thing
> about this approach is that since there is no run-time,
> there is nothing to certify!

Since GNORT is a small subset of Ada 95, would that make it significantly
easier to build a cross-compiler to target simple 8/16 bit microcontrollers?

I know the topic of Ada for low-end micros has been discussed before in c.l.a
and that you see little market demand for it.  However if a SPARK-like subset
of Ada targeted at the popular Motorola M68HCXX, Atmel AVR, or the new
Microchip PIC18FXXX  architectures were available, I think many people would
welcome it as an alternative to C.

F. Britt Snodgrass

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own