Re: Ada and Automotive Industry

[eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)]

  Richard Riehle said:

  > I continue to be a staunch supporter of Ada, but I see no
  > justification for Ada on the I8051.  This view is not based
  > simply on the fact that it is an eight-bit processor. Rather,
  > it is based on the unique architecture of that machine. 

  > I would like to think I am wrong about this. But it will take
  > someone who knows both Ada and the 8051 architecture well to
  > persuade me that I am....

  > On the other hand, more conventional eight-bit architectures,
  > might be quite well suited to a restricted Ada subset.

   I was thinking about this on the drive home last night.  Ada on the
68000 family and the old National 16000 chips was no real problem, and
the Intel 8088 was a pain, but done due to the wide availability of PC
clones once upon a time.

   But most of those chips fall into the 8/16 category.  (I'm thinking
of the 68008, etc.  not their "big" brothers.)  Has Ada ever been
targeted to a machine where the largest registers are 16-bits?  Such a
compiler is possible, but it would be an effort.  (Hmmm.  Doesn't that
describe the Western Digital compiler?  The Russian compiler for the
PDP-11 clone doesn't count, since the address register on most 11s has
22-bits.)

   Having said that, if given a choice would I target the 8051 or the
Z80?  Z80 I think.  What about the 68HC11?  Any other reasonable
choices?

   (Incidently there have been several successful validations of very
useful Ada compilers on 24-bit machines, so that establishes a range.
Twenty-four bits is plenty, sixteen bits is cramped, and less than
that probably wouldn't be useful.)

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...