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,cc3c5a58c46ea9c4
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.182.229 with SMTP id eh5mr1241953wic.1.1364344001061;
        Tue, 26 Mar 2013 17:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 p18ni19750wiv.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!85.12.40.139.MISMATCH!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsgate.cuhk.edu.hk!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Runtime startup code for the GNAT Runtime...and a bit of humble
 pie.
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:16:10 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <87wqt3cl1x.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
References: <a7ba9221-84a5-4486-9dcc-c4abda92a326@googlegroups.com>
	<21ad4ef7-0e4a-40ba-ac3f-fe21018c7bd9@googlegroups.com>
	<ki9d7h$3os$2@dont-email.me> <ki9n00$b1$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="b921703552c61b967b71297e4575db24";
	logging-data="18421"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+vz5ZAVbuWpj4aUcpSw4Dr"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:J7h/hDzu5DT1Pj1QinzM/2eNZdE=
	sha1:wK01SKNV6t+7PESqu5IkSh4B8Hw=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2013-03-19T19:16:10+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Simon Clubley writes:
> One of the reasons to use Ada over, say C, is for the increased reliability
> of the code. However, what if the ported Ada RTS actually results in more
> unreliable code because of issues the person porting the RTS did not fully
> understand or was simply was not aware of ?
>
> That's not too bad if your faulty project is sitting on your workbench when
> it fails, but what if you have chosen to run Ada in a robot or model aircraft
> because you wanted increased reliability in those environments ?
>
> I've gone back and forth on this in my mind for quite some time and my
> current thinking is to use C for the low-end bare metal parts of a project
> and to use Ada (under say RTEMS) for the higher level parts of a project.
>
> I've looked around for languages with real time capabilities, a small
> footprint, easy to port to a range of new environments in a reliable way,
> and under active development but after considering the options, I chose
> (reluctantly) to stay with C for the low end bare metal code.

Just a wild idea: have you considered writing these bare-metal parts in
Ada with no run-time whatsoever, linking and importing some existing
routines from the C run-time?  Is this an acceptable compromise?

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.