Re: C vs. ada for embeded system

[anon@anon.org (anon)]

Ada is a more perfect portable language while C has become a damaged language
by the use of macros and conditional statements. Which initially allowed 
C and other software written in C to become portable has now branched into 
a nightmare for programmers to maintain the older software.

Ada has no language defined macros or conditional statements only a number 
of packages that need to be rewritten for each platform and/or OS used. And 
the specific machine and platform dependent code of these packages are 
transparent to the programmers and their software. Giving a better and more 
portable language to use.

Plus, the built-in features like tasking and safety makes Ada a winner. Of 
course, the closer you get to perfection for a language the higher the cost.

To Correct "Jeffrey R. Carter" and a few others here.

AT&T with help from GE, and MIT created "unix" (all lowercase, was used for 
first version name) was written in 1969, using assembly for a GE-645 and 
rewritten again in assembly in 1970, for a PDP-7, before C existed.  C was 
written in 1972 for a general purpose language for the OS "unix". Later, in 
1973, AT&T rewrote "unix" in C and renamed it using uppercase letters. 

Also from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix".  
  "The migration from assembly language to the higher-level language C 
  resulted in much more portable software, requiring only a relatively small
  amount of machine-dependent code to be replaced when porting Unix to 
  other computing platforms."


So, "Jeffrey R. Carter" and a few others get the fact straight. AT&T 
developed "unix" using assembly. Then to help make their OS more 
portable they rewote the OS in C, three years later! So, C was not 
developed to write AT&T "unix"!



In <gotp01$kbm$1@news.metronet.hr>, "abcd" <aa@aa.com> writes:
>why ada is better of  "C" language  for embeded system? 
>
>