* Ada2C++ @ 2000-01-09 0:00 BRETTSYS1 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Brian Rogoff ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: BRETTSYS1 @ 2000-01-09 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Does anyone know if there is a utility that will take Ada95 source and convert it into C++ source? Thanks brett brettsys1@aol.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-09 0:00 Ada2C++ BRETTSYS1 @ 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Ross 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Tucker Taft ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Brian Rogoff @ 2000-01-09 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On 9 Jan 2000, BRETTSYS1 wrote: > Does anyone know if there is a utility that will take Ada95 source and convert > it into C++ source? Averstar/Intermetrics offers an Ada->C compiler I think, and it is claimed that it generates readable C source. If you want something which translates Ada 95 into human usable C++, using corresponding concepts in C++ to Ada ones, and concurrency libraries to handle Ada concurrency, I know of no such tool accept a human programmer who knows both languages. -- Brian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Brian Rogoff @ 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ross 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Jeff Carter 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Ross @ 2000-01-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) There ought to be such a tool since all language features that I can think of off the top of my head have an approximate equivalent in both languages. Maybe that just goes to show how divergent the industry is with those using Ada having no interest in or need for C++ and vica versa. Maybe someone would like to knock something up for Brett before they go home tonight..... R. Brian Rogoff wrote: > On 9 Jan 2000, BRETTSYS1 wrote: > > Does anyone know if there is a utility that will take Ada95 source and convert > > it into C++ source? > > Averstar/Intermetrics offers an Ada->C compiler I think, and it is claimed > that it generates readable C source. > > If you want something which translates Ada 95 into human usable C++, using > corresponding concepts in C++ to Ada ones, and concurrency libraries to > handle Ada concurrency, I know of no such tool accept a human programmer > who knows both languages. > > -- Brian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Ross @ 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Jeff Carter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Jeff Carter @ 2000-01-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <387A1122.4769ED21@gec.com>, Ross <@gec.com> wrote: > There ought to be such a tool since all language features that I can think of off > the top of my head have an approximate equivalent in both languages... Apparently you can't think of tasking off the top of your head. -- Jeff Carter "Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time." -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-09 0:00 Ada2C++ BRETTSYS1 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Brian Rogoff @ 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Tucker Taft 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ jedilowe 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey 3 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Tucker Taft @ 2000-01-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: BRETTSYS1 BRETTSYS1 wrote: > > Does anyone know if there is a utility that will take Ada95 source and convert > it into C++ source? As mentioned in another note, we have compilation technology that does some of this. We offer a service, where we will convert Ada to C/C++ (it is configurable whether we use any C++ features in the output). The output includes the original Ada comments and the original Ada variables names, etc. We take advantage of the C++ "namespace" feature if requested. The code is properly indented, and makes use of C control structures like while, switch, etc. This translation service is priced on a per-thousand-line-of-code basis. Contact us for more details. We also have a version of our Ada95 compiler that uses optimized ANSI C as its intermediate representation. This allows you to continue to program in Ada indefinitely, while using an off-the-shelf C compiler to do the final object code generation. This allows you to use Ada on platforms where there is no other Ada offering, and/or allows you to integrate easily with other code being written in C or C++. There are validated versions of this AdaMagic-with-C-intermediate compiler for Analog Devices SHARC/Eonic Virtuoso and for Sun SPARC/Solaris. We have an analogous offering that uses Java byte codes as its intermediate representation, with similar benefits. > > Thanks > brett > > brettsys1@aol.com -- -Tucker Taft stt@averstar.com http://www.averstar.com/~stt/ Technical Director, Distributed IT Solutions (www.averstar.com/tools) AverStar (formerly Intermetrics, Inc.) Burlington, MA USA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Tucker Taft @ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` jedilowe 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ David Starner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: jedilowe @ 2000-02-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I will say that I think the intermediate C and Java representations are brilliant for extending the marketing ability, though I can imagine some of the battles with hard performance criteria prophets over layers of abstraction. My question though, If Ada 95 has such powerful interface capabilities to other languages, why is translation even a question? Is the interface between languages more of a concept, not actually been realized in toolsets? I am familiar of a great deal of success interfacing Ada 83 code with Jovial, where the Ada code acts as the executive and the Jovial is the legacy operations, but this is not accomplished using a commercial compiler, or hardware platform. The 'interfacability' is a big advantage for the sellability for some of my customers, so it would be nice to know if it is not all that realisitic in the large before a benefit becomes a blemish if it does not live up to the promises. Thanks Tony Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ jedilowe @ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Richard D Riehle 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: David Starner @ 2000-02-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Tue, 01 Feb 2000 03:09:26 GMT, jedilowe@my-deja.com <jedilowe@my-deja.com> wrote: >I will say that I think the intermediate C and Java representations are >brilliant for extending the marketing ability, though I can imagine some >of the battles with hard performance criteria prophets over layers of >abstraction. My question though, If Ada 95 has such powerful interface >capabilities to other languages, why is translation even a question? The Ada2C compiler is mainly for platforms where there is no native Ada compiler yet. I've never heard of an Ada2Java compiler - the one's I've heard about compile to the JVM. That may seem nitpicking, but it helps to look at it as a port to a new platform, one that happens to have emulators all over the place. Notice that neither of these are about interface capabilities. Ada2C has the same Interfaces.C support that most Ada compilers have. Ada2JVM still needs an Interfaces.Java and some glue, and that could be added to any Ada compiler with a Java compiler to the same platform. (That is,a native code Java compiler.) -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ David Starner @ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle 2000-02-02 0:00 ` Ada2C++ jedilowe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Richard D Riehle @ 2000-02-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) >On Tue, 01 Feb 2000 03:09:26 GMT, jedilowe@my-deja.com <jedilowe@my deja.com> wrote: >> My question though, If Ada 95 has such powerful interface >>capabilities to other languages, why is translation even a question? Ada is a high-level language. C is a low-level language, closer to being a universal assembler. As such, translating to C sometimes makes it easier to generate the intermediate code that can be compiled to executable on a given platform. This approach is taken by other high-level languages, notably, Eiffel. There is a danger, though. C is less reliable than one might hope. There a lots of little gotchas. For example, direct translation to C from some strongly-typed high-level language can run into problems such as the famous integer overflow feature. For validated Ada, this is not a problem since a compiler that fails to accomodate this error from C would not pass validation. For current Eiffel compilers this is still a problem. Translation from one language to another is always a perilous undertaking. We use the word undertaking here in all of its meanings, including those that reflect morbidity. Richard Riehle richard@adaworks.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Richard D Riehle @ 2000-02-02 0:00 ` jedilowe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: jedilowe @ 2000-02-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Just to clarify, I am not disputing the idea of translating to an intermediate representation for a greater scope of usability, but it sounded like the question was directed at translating and updating. I worked on a project that had 20 developers spend 9 weeks translating from a specialized 1970's language into Ada. Basically, the entire effort was a political manuvering (though a very expensive one) but the result was pretty useless. Unless the design and context are identical, it does not make sense to translate, because it does not address the most difficult part of coding, fixing. Basically, the developers still had to go learn every bit of the functionality to be able to fix it, and most ended up rewriting what was there and just called it reuse. The question comes down to, how solid is the existing code. The translation is only successful if it is very solid, and then the question is, why not interface instead of translate? The question I had, is the multi-language interface in the same linked executable widely used? Is it universally successful, or does it depend on each of the variants (e.g. platform, compilers, linker...)? Thanks for the response though. Tony Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-09 0:00 Ada2C++ BRETTSYS1 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Brian Rogoff 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Tucker Taft @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Frode Tenneboe 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ E. Robert Tisdale 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey 3 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Frode Tenneboe @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 499 bytes --] BRETTSYS1 (brettsys1@aol.com) wrote: : Does anyone know if there is a utility that will take Ada95 source and convert : it into C++ source? To be honest: The other way around is much more appealing. -Frode -- ^ Frode Tenneb� | email: ft@edh.ericsson.se ^ | Ericsson Radar AS. N-1788 Halden | | | Phone: +47 69 21 41 47 | Frode@IRC | | with Standard.Disclaimer; use Standard.Disclaimer; | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` E. Robert Tisdale 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: E. Robert Tisdale @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Frode Tenneboe wrote: > BRETTSYS1 (brettsys1@aol.com) wrote: > : Does anyone know if there is a utility > : that will take Ada95 source and convert it into C++ source? > > To be honest: The other way around is much more appealing. No. I don't think you'd like that. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ E. Robert Tisdale @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Charles Hixson @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) "E. Robert Tisdale" wrote: > Frode Tenneboe wrote: > > > BRETTSYS1 (brettsys1@aol.com) wrote: > > : Does anyone know if there is a utility > > : that will take Ada95 source and convert it into C++ source? > > > > To be honest: The other way around is much more appealing. > > No. I don't think you'd like that. The only reason that I might not like it is that most translators produce very ugly code. OTOH, I believe that I might be quite difficult to do this properly for more than a small subset of the C++ language. Anything that involves recasting pointers, e.g., should refuse to translate. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada2C++ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ E. Robert Tisdale 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Charles Hixson @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Frode Tenneboe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Frode Tenneboe @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 754 bytes --] E. Robert Tisdale (edwin@netwood.net) wrote: : Frode Tenneboe wrote: : > BRETTSYS1 (brettsys1@aol.com) wrote: : > : Does anyone know if there is a utility : > : that will take Ada95 source and convert it into C++ source? : > : > To be honest: The other way around is much more appealing. : No. I don't think you'd like that. Provided, of course, that the resulting output is smaller, easier to read and produces code which can be better optimised. :-) -Frode -- ^ Frode Tenneb� | email: ft@edh.ericsson.se ^ | Ericsson Radar AS. N-1788 Halden | | | Phone: +47 69 21 41 47 | Frode@IRC | | with Standard.Disclaimer; use Standard.Disclaimer; | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* ada2cpp 2000-01-09 0:00 Ada2C++ BRETTSYS1 ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` denizbey 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Pat Rogers ` (2 more replies) 3 siblings, 3 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: denizbey @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) check this http://ada2cpp.co.il/ Deniz -- Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Pat Rogers 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Richard D Riehle 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 2 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) <denizbey@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:86s1sc$1ei$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > check this > > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ Humm, a (partial) Ada83 to C++ translator. The Ada code obviously works, otherwise it isn't worth translating. For some unusual situation, fine. But for the fad chasers, IMHO a product that requires stupidity on the part of management is both sad and very likely to wildly succeed. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Pat Rogers @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Richard D Riehle @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <s93a1sm9q0s153@corp.supernews.com>, "Pat Rogers" <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote: >For some unusual situation, fine. But for the fad chasers, IMHO a >product that requires stupidity on the part of management is both sad >and very likely to wildly succeed. Pat. There are a lot of stupid C++ chasers out there. I have even been told by one manager that [paraphrasing] "Ada is probably a better language, but we have to move to C++ so we can hire programmers and find tools." Anyone who would choose C++ over Ada in the pursuit of reliable software either 1) does not understand C++ or 2) does not understand Ada, or 3) does not understand either one, or 3) has agenda that has nothing to do with technological excellence. Richard Riehle richard@adaworks.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Pat Rogers @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Gautier 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Marin D. Condic 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 2 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Gautier @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > check this > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ I like the basic "Price := 20_000$ -- U.S. dollars" for a "not 100% automatic" tool, where "Ada tasks are not supported"! How can it compete with a famous free translator - the one that translates all Ada 83 and 95 directly into optimized native machine code ? Is it a thing for bluffing pointy haired bosses ?... -- Gautier _____\\________________\_______\ http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp David 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Marin D. Condic 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3891AD32.EA362750@maths.unine.ch>, Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> wrote: > > check this > > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ > > How can it compete with a famous free translator > - the one that translates all Ada 83 and 95 directly into optimized > native machine code ? Gnat doesn't compile Ada83 code, just Ada 95. Given that Ada 83 is now an obsolete standard, there are probably a lot of less technical managers out there thinking, "If I have to port the code anyway, why not port it to {insert fad language here} instead of Ada 95?". Of course the truth is porting to Ada95 is usually trivial, porting to C++ is often incredibly difficult, and code maintianed in C++ is liable to be significantly buggier. And who knows how much damage to profits, property, and/or life one of those extra bugs may cause? But agreeing with people who employ (or want to employ) you is a lot easier than disabusing them. I can see a tremendous business oppertunity here, for someone who has no moral qualms about doing harm to their own customers if asked to by those same customers. In many lines of engineering there's an explicit code of ethics that this would violate, but not software! -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` David 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: David @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dennison In article <86sn03$hmj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote: > In article <3891AD32.EA362750@maths.unine.ch>, > Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> wrote: > > > check this > > > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ > > > > How can it compete with a famous free translator > > - the one that translates all Ada 83 and 95 directly into optimized > > native machine code ? > > Gnat doesn't compile Ada83 code, just Ada 95. > Where did you ever get that idea? Here is a small excerpt from the GNAT User's Guide, titled obscurely enough "Compiling Ada 83 Programs" Compiling Ada 83 Programs -gnat83 Although GNAT is primarily an Ada 95 compiler, it accepts this switch to specify that an Ada 83 program is to be compiled in Ada83 mode. If you specify this switch, GNAT rejects most Ada 95 extensions and applies Ada 83 semantics where this can be done easily. It is not possible to guarantee this switch does a perfect job; for example, some subtle tests, such as are found in earlier ACVC tests (that have been removed from the ACVC suite for Ada 95), may not compile correctly. However, for most purposes, using this switch should help to ensure that programs that compile correctly under the -gnat83 switch can be ported easily to an Ada 83 compiler. This is the main use of the switch. With few exceptions (most notably the need to use <> on unconstrained generic formal parameters, the use of the new Ada 95 keywords, and the use of packages with optional bodies), it is not necessary to use the -gnat83 switch when compiling Ada 83 programs, because, with rare exceptions, Ada 95 is upwardly compatible with Ada 83. This means that a correct Ada 83 program is usually also a correct Ada 95 program. -gnat95 This switch specifies normal Ada 95 mode, and cancels the effect of any previously given -gnat83 switch. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp David @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-30 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <86svea$oal$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, David C. Hoos, Sr. <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote: > In article <86sn03$hmj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote: > > Gnat doesn't compile Ada83 code, just Ada 95. > > > Where did you ever get that idea? By reading the Gnat docs (and actually using it on a project once): > you specify this switch, GNAT rejects most Ada 95 extensions and > applies Ada 83 semantics where this can be done easily. It is not > possible to guarantee this switch does a perfect job; for example, some > subtle tests, such as are found in earlier ACVC tests (that have been > removed from the ACVC suite for Ada 95), may not compile correctly. Another way to look at it is, "Is this switch intended to allow me to compile working Ada 83 code under gnat?" Here's the answer to that: > However, for most purposes, using this switch should help to ensure > that programs that compile correctly under the -gnat83 switch can be > ported easily to an Ada 83 compiler. This is the main use of the > switch. It is useful for some source compatability purposes. But it does *not* put Gnat into a mode where it is an Ada83 compiler. -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-30 0:00 ` Gautier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Gautier @ 2000-01-30 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > It is useful for some source compatability purposes. But it does *not* > put Gnat into a mode where it is an Ada83 compiler. Anyway, be reassured: the 83->95 upward compatilibility is ~99.995%. I did port a >100'000 lines program from Alsys (Ada 83) to GNAT, without ever using the -gnat83. There were +/- 5 lines to change: - a pragma Elaborate_body in 1 package - generic_elementary_functions to Ada.(the same) - a 1 place, GNAT couldn't decide between character and wide_character (a loop). That's all! For my own projects in numerics I have plenty of packages that travel from DEC Ada (83) to GNAT and vice versa without any change... -- Gautier _____\\________________\_______\ http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Marin D. Condic 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Marin D. Condic @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Gautier wrote: > > > check this > > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ > > I like the basic "Price := 20_000$ -- U.S. dollars" for a "not 100% automatic" tool, > where "Ada tasks are not supported"! > How can it compete with a famous free translator > - the one that translates all Ada 83 and 95 directly into optimized native machine code ? > Is it a thing for bluffing pointy haired bosses ?... > And call it Ada2asm? Sounds like a great idea to me! The only problem being the obvious: too many competing standards for the "asm" part. MDC -- ============================================================= Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - 1.800.555.3393 1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 http://www.quadruscorp.com/ m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m Visit my web site at: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Capitalism without failure is like religion without sin." -- Allan Meltzer, Economist ============================================================= ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: ada2cpp 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Pat Rogers 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier @ 2000-01-28 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) denizbey@my-deja.com wrote: > http://ada2cpp.co.il/ Not a bad piece of work (Ada to C++ translator). But I hope you first tell your customers that they would be better off translating to Ada95, and possibly using the Intermetrics compiler that targets C if they don't have an Ada compiler available. Otherwise, this line of work seems to be the software equivalent of hawking cigarettes. Sure your customers may outright demand it. But you're not exactly doing them or the world a service by giving it to them. It would be interesting to see this move towards being an actual compiler like the Intermetrics one, though. -- T.E.D. Home - mailto:dennison@telepath.com Work - mailto:dennison@ssd.fsi.com WWW - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html ICQ - 10545591 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-02-02 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2000-01-09 0:00 Ada2C++ BRETTSYS1 2000-01-09 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Brian Rogoff 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Ross 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Jeff Carter 2000-01-10 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Tucker Taft 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ jedilowe 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ David Starner 2000-02-01 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Richard D Riehle 2000-02-02 0:00 ` Ada2C++ jedilowe 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ada2C++ E. Robert Tisdale 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Ada2C++ Frode Tenneboe 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp denizbey 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Pat Rogers 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Richard D Riehle 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp David 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison 2000-01-30 0:00 ` ada2cpp Gautier 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Marin D. Condic 2000-01-28 0:00 ` ada2cpp Ted Dennison
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox