From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: C vs. ada for embeded system
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:16:28 +0100
Date: 2009-03-07T14:16:30+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8qaoccjdmu1t.fbdmls7j02b9.dlg@40tude.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: gotp01$kbm$1@news.metronet.hr
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 13:23:32 +0100, abcd wrote:
> why ada is better of "C" language for embeded system?
That depends on many factors. What worked for us was:
1. Portability. We develop and test under Windows. The target platform is
used only incidentally. We use same code for both, no single line of
preprocessor;
2. Language standard;
3. Tasking support (yes, we needed tasks);
4. OOPL;
5. Excellent support (AdaCore).
Disadvantages:
1. Damn difficult to get a compiler;
2. Tool chain (IDE, debugger etc) for Ada is not that good. Well not bad
when compared with Workbench/Eclipse, but still no match to Visual Studio;
3. Initial costs are much higher than for C.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-07 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-07 12:23 C vs. ada for embeded system abcd
2009-03-07 13:16 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2009-03-07 18:12 ` Martin
2009-03-07 18:18 ` Pascal Obry
2009-03-07 18:29 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2009-03-07 19:54 ` Per Sandberg
2009-03-07 23:26 ` anon
2009-03-08 10:43 ` Pascal Obry
2009-03-09 16:02 ` mccormick
2009-03-10 17:33 ` Martin Krischik
2009-03-11 10:14 ` christoph.grein
2009-03-11 14:07 ` John McCormick
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox