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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b9c193e01cab96e4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!195.14.215.230.MISMATCH!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-hp2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: C vs. ada for embeded system
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <gotp01$kbm$1@news.metronet.hr>
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:16:28 +0100
Message-ID: <8qaoccjdmu1t.fbdmls7j02b9.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 07 Mar 2009 14:16:30 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: e8adf6a5.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=1_l^7C`Z=PX=>bdbdS?M0YMcF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQ^YC2XCjHcbYLT1Ca=D7GD[DNcfSJ;bb[UIRnRBaCd<M^cRT\Y7TneQZc6B;kSIQh`^
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3999
Date: 2009-03-07T14:16:30+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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