Re: ada and robots

["Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-93" <condicma@PWFL.COM>]

dana@INDYWEB.NET writes:
>      A:  No, or at least not many.  It's hard to put an exact reason as
>to why but it is thought that these MCs are just "too small" in terms of
>address space etc to support a multitasking language/runtime.  Hello world
>generated by DDCI's sun cross 80386EX compiler is JUST under 16k with the
>non-tasking runtime.  I've seen similar performance from other Ada
>compilers.  The whole answer is much longer but has been discussed at
>length in this group.  Now, that being said, it is still worth a check of
>adahome to see what the vendors have.  I could be wrong.  It wouldn't be
>the first time:-)
>
    I've found a few microcontroller vendors out on the web which seem
    to have products that might fit the bill: Z-World
    (http://www.zworld.com/) who makes a Z180 based system, Micronix
    (http://www.agt.net/public/micronix/) with a 68HC11 based system
    and Claritech (http://www.claritech.demon.co.uk/) with a SH7032
    and a 68032 based system. All appear to have a C development
    environment available and all appear to be reasonably priced. It
    would seem to be cost effective to go this sort of route rather
    than trying to cobble together your own development system even if
    you could find an Ada compiler targeted to one of these chips.
    (Getting the generated code is only *part* of the problem. You've
    still got to get it loaded into the box, working with some
    reasonable monitor system, outputting symbols for a cross-platform
    debugger, etc, etc, etc. Do you *really* want to spend time doing
    that when you can buy the whole ball of wax for under $200?)

    Modern Ada compilers and modern microprocessors should not impose
    any inherent barriers because of space. We managed to get a whole
    rocket engine control system into 48k words on a Mil-Std-1750a
    microprocessor. Most of these microcontrollers will give you five
    times that space right off the shelf. Older compilers did indeed
    have a problem with space, largely due to tasking support. But I
    am informed by people who should know (as well as practical
    experience) that this is a problem of the past.

>2)    Q:  Is Ada used in robotics?  This is a question several occasional
>posters to this group could have answered.  But the answers weren't
>exactly what the original poster was looking for.  Robotics is a vary
>broad field ranging from little critters skittering about on the floor
>with 8 bit micro controllers to large kinematically redundant manipulator
>mechanisms with multiple 32 bit high performance processors.
>
    To the extent that engine controls apply lots of the same
    principles used in robotics (feedback loops, etc to control the
    motion of actuators) I can testify that Ada is indeed adequate in
    and of itself to do the job. And in that sense, it is used quite
    extensively in this sort of "robotics" application. The problem is
    not so much one of "is the language suitable?" or "is the language
    used in this domain?" as it is one of "is the language available
    for the target I have in mind?"

    You're on target with the notion that there is no single correct
    answer in language selection for all projects. I believe Ada has
    lots of technical merit over other choices, but technical merit
    isn't the only selection parameter.

    MDC

Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer     ATT:        561.796.8997
Pratt & Whitney GESP, M/S 731-96, P.O.B. 109600  Fax:        561.796.4669
West Palm Beach, FL, 33410-9600                  Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
===============================================================================
    "Having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as
    of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."

        --  G.K. Chesterton
===============================================================================