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: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930
X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-26 16:23:53 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: xanthian@well.com (Kent Paul Dolan)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc
Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers?
Date: 26 Apr 2003 16:23:52 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <a3eaa964.0304261523.456ecfbe@posting.google.com>
References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com>
 <rVzpa.583781$3D1.323774@sccrnsc01>
 <9fa75d42.0304240446.493ca906@posting.google.com> <3EA7E0E3.8020407@crs4.it>
 <9fa75d42.0304240950.45114a39@posting.google.com>
 <cf333042.0304241530.1e32ec98@posting.google.com>
 <b8bfn1$ori$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.8.249.148
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1051399433 17563 127.0.0.1 (26 Apr 2003 23:23:53
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Apr 2003 23:23:53 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62726 comp.object:62092
 comp.lang.ada:36621 misc.misc:13725
Date: 2003-04-26T23:23:53+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@d2-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote
> In comp.lang.ada Kaz Kylheku <kaz@ashi.footprints.net> wrote:

> : Ada is a high level assembly language like C, Pascal, Modula, PL/I and
> : so on. It's suitable only for stone age systems programming. It
> : doesn't matter at all which of these types of languages you use for
> : this kind of programming; the choice is purely pragmatic based on the
> : non-technical factors that make some languages more preferred than
> : other languages for programming some platforms.

Well, if that list were correct, Java, and every other third
generation
language would count as "high level assembly languages".  That term is
usually reserved for C, because C constructs typically map one for one
to assembly language instructions.  I seriously doubt that, say, Ada's
"rendezvous" construct has such a mapping.

> Wow. Generic polymorphic objects being high level assembly, and
> modern LISPs proudly presenting bit manipulations. Interesting times
> full of technical "arguments"...

Well, assembly languages are typically typeless, so _everything_ is
"polymorphic"; you aren't going to win many cigars with _that_
approach <grin>.

Tell me more about Lispy-Bits; sounds like a breakfast cereal.

xanthian.