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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5f6125e9594f9968
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.232.169 with SMTP id tp9mr2288284pbc.6.1333208769214;
        Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni3151pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: kalvin.news@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada to C translator for small microcontrollers
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:46:08 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <8580709.239.1333208768840.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynes7>
References: <2424259e-cf1c-408e-a57e-f2c948087186@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>
 <18324383.19.1332841560517.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbht7>
 <jkssvu$1sh0$1@news.ett.com.ua>
 <26305817.1823.1332879226490.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbiz13>
 <9tgt0lFqtU1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.150.124.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1333208769 9016 127.0.0.1 (31 Mar 2012 15:46:09
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:46:09 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <9tgt0lFqtU1@mid.individual.net>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.150.124.2;
 posting-account=QrZwxQoAAAByl3YAWTpexAk3yBYyZMHn
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-03-31T08:46:08-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

keskiviikkona 28. maaliskuuta 2012 19.36.37 UTC+3 Niklas Holsti kirjoitti:
> It is true that C does not provide all the features of assembly=20
> language, for all that it is called a "portable assembler". But I'm not=
=20
> sure that this would be a large handicap for an Ada compiler that uses C=
=20
> as an intermediate language (like the SofCheck one).
>=20
> The C level could be a performance bottleneck if one wanted to support=20
> wider numbers in Ada than the C compiler supports -- for example, an Ada=
=20
> 64-bit Long_Integer with a C compiler that supports only 32-bit integers=
=20
> -- but this is a marginal effect, I think.

Yes, the translator should be implemented so, that it would be compatible w=
ith the target C ie. no support for 64-bit integers etc. if the target C co=
mpiler doesn't support that.=20

Nested procedures are also a bit tricy to implement in C, as the local stac=
k frame needs to made visible to the inner procedure. This is doable with t=
he struct of pointers passed as parameters for the "inner procedure", I gue=
ss. It is up to target C compiler optimization how much penalty there will =
be.

Br,
Kalvin