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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,539c04254abf1b37 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f6912,fd6a0f1d05ce01f8 X-Google-Attributes: gidf6912,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-23 10:36:59 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!feeder.qis.net!btnet-peer!btnet-peer0!btnet!newsr2.u-net.net!peernews!peer.cwci.net!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news2-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "martin.m.dowie" Newsgroups: sci.military.naval,comp.lang.ada References: <3C74E519.3F5349C4@baesystems.com> <20020221205157.05542.00000012@mb-cm.news.cs.com> <3C763746.CC8B2965@baesystems.com> Subject: Re: naval systems X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 18:36:14 -0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.104.120.58 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news2-win.server.ntlworld.com 1014489389 213.104.120.58 (Sat, 23 Feb 2002 18:36:29 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 18:36:29 GMT Organization: ntlworld News Service X-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 18:36:57 GMT (newsr2.u-net.net) Xref: archiver1.google.com sci.military.naval:102719 comp.lang.ada:20310 Date: 2002-02-23T18:36:14+00:00 List-Id: > Something over ten years ago, I took an Ada training class at Texas > Instruments. (It was really a review for me, but I needed the review.) One > of the features of the class was a videotape of a Q&A session with Jean > Ichbiah and two other Ada luminaries. > > Ichbiah was asked that precise question, about the size of the runtime, and > how it seemed that it would be too big for anything practical. > > His answer was that a just-about-fully-compliant Ada runtime module had been > written in 4K words. Note well his choice of words: not "could be" but > "HAD BEEN" (emphasis added). > > Not long after that, I had occasion to check that answer, for the Tartan > Labs toolset for the TI 320C30 32-bit floating point digital signal > processor. The Ada runtime module for that processor was, indeed, about 4K > words. This rather shocked my supervisor at the time; he'd just assumed it > would be prohibitively big and NEVER LOOKED. > > I don't know very many embedded systems that can't scratch up 4K words of > code space for a runtime kernel. >From what I can gather this is the same size a non-tasking Ravenscar-profile RTK - for tasking add another 9 or 10K, but still not exactly huge is it?