Re: Ada Stuff and some confusion

["Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com>]

"chris.danx" <chris.danx@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:BW3z6.4644$bL6.871904@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
> You mean this is a definition?
>
>     type x is record
>         ....
>     end record;
>
> And this is a declaration
>
>     a : x;
>
No, not correct. Although that is the way it would seem intuitively. Check
out some of the syntax charts (BNF Notation) in the ARM - especially for
things like a type declaration or procedure declaration. You'll notice that
they say things like <something_definition>; <-(Note the semicolon here!!!)
The definition comes first (explaining the pattern, if you will) then the
semicolon makes it a declaration. One of the reasons the two things are
separated is because a definition may appear in more places than a
declaration can.


> > Just be advised that a man who represents himself has a fool for a
> client.:-)
>
> Don't understand this, what do you mean?
>
An old saying among lawyers - words to the effect of "A lawyer who defends
himself has a fool for a client". The reason being that no matter how smart
a lawyer may be or how skilled he may be, with his own case, he cannot be
dispassionate, rational and objective. Hence, he is a fool to try to defend
himself. When applied to the layman attempting to practice law on his own
behalf, it adds even more meaning. Just because you're smart and watched
lots of cop/lawyer shows on TV, doesn't mean you can defend yourself in
court. Its a specialization and you don't have the knowledge to do a good
job of it.

Of course, one needs also to consider the source... ;-)


> > (Are you going to build "Ada-ix" - The Great American Operating System?
>
> Are you being serious.  It wasn't clear for me from the context.  I have
all
> sorts of problems with English and Context.  Give me Ada anyday! <g>
>
I was playing off of "Unix". (Also off of an Americanism about retiring to
write "The Great American Novel" - like Mobey Dick.) Not entirely without
some seriousness in there. If you're looking for a name, I'd shoot for
something a little sexier and different.

If you are interested in writing an OS in Ada, maybe you want to look at:
http://www.adaos.org/ and drop Nick Roberts a line. An OS is a big thing
that could take years to do - you'll probably want some help! :-) I've not
seen much in the way of activity here in a while.

>
> I wan't to do an OS that's reliable and doesn't suffer from C-Pointer-itus
> which is what most of my C code suffers from.  All that pointer to char
> stuff for strings is what get's me everytime.  Plus C isn't really
> standardized, no matter what folk tell you!
>
Better you should contribute to an ongoing effort than start something like
this yourself. You're talking about a *LOT* of code and you'd benefit from
the knowledge others can bring to the table.

If AdaOS looked like it was going to have a solid realtime, embedded subset
kernel, I'd be interested myself. (Poverty of Time!!!) I even know of a
specific app that is *dying* for a good quality realtime OS and the market
is wide open. But they seem to be shooting for something more along the
lines of a WinNT replacement & that's not my interest.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/