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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,447bd1cf7a88c198
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-04 09:20:14 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Do we need "Mission-Critical" software? Was: What to Do?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 17:09:49 GMT
Organization: Deja.com
Message-ID: <932aol$ikc$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <3A4F5A4A.9ABA2C4F@chicagonet.net> <3A4F759E.A7D63F3F@netwood.net>
 <3A50ABDF.3A8F6C0D@acm.org> <92qdnn$jfg$1@news.huji.ac.il>
 <3A50C371.8B7B871@home.com> <3A51EC04.91353CE7@uol.com.br>
 <3A529C97.2CA4777F@home.com> <3A53CB9E.EA7CF86C@uol.com.br>
 <3A5466DE.811D43A5@acm.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.48.27.130
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jan 04 17:09:49 2001 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US;
 m18) Gecko/20001207
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x60.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3657
Date: 2001-01-04T17:09:49+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3A5466DE.811D43A5@acm.org>,
  Marin David Condic <mcondic.nospam@acm.org> wrote:
> remains a lot of perception that Ada is "A Bad Thing" based on all
> sorts of misconceptions and odd preferences on the part of many

I don't think that is really an insurmountable problem, as long as we
can somehow manage to start to get them while they're young. Sure, the
old-timers around them will persist in saying C/Fortran/Whatever is far
superior, but since when did a young developer seriously listen to an
old-timer? :-)

> Personally, I'd like to see an OS that was capable of running on a
> PC, but was suitable for realtime work. (Windows is not, which has
> spawned a market for add-on products that make it usable in
> realtime.) If it came in source code and modular pieces that made
> it easy to pick and choose what you wanted for an embedded product,
> it would have an advantage in that it could run on a PC where you
> could do your development & then have an easy path to the
> embedded machine. (The sort of direction that Lynuxworks has gone in)

I'm with you on that one. Two of the last 3 projects I worked on were
attempting to do real-time work on PC hardware. I think there is a
tremendous market out there (which is why there are so many different
efforts underway already).

For me, the current great hope is HURD. They claim that if you
substitute a real-time micorkernel for the non-realtime MACH, HURD will
become a full real-time platform, without having to write special
software and/or segregate the normal software off into some non-realtime
subsystem like happens with all the NT and Linux approaches. Supposedly
there are real-time MACH's around, so it ought to be doable.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/