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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,32cfbb718858528b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-10 16:22:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Commercial C To Ada 95 compiler Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:34:26 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <3D002D11.CC706952@adaworks.com> <4519e058.0206071148.9b87acf@posting.google.com> <3D0116F3.7254E263@despammed.com> <3D018106.6080004@worldnet.att.net> <5ee5b646.0206080411.7da58d12@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1023716067 11785 136.170.200.133 (10 Jun 2002 13:34:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jun 2002 13:34:27 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25706 Date: 2002-06-10T13:34:27+00:00 List-Id: Its just difficult to imagine a situation in which a C-to-Ada translator is a *good* solution to any sort of reasonably long-term problem. As a quick-and-dirty fix to a short term problem, maybe, but not if you have to live with it for very long. Hence, not a lot of incentive to fund the production of such a tool. In some development environments I've been in, the management attitude towards old code goes something like this: If the original developer of some body of code quits, I declare that a "Legacy System" and no further development/enhancement is done on it. The reason is that it is just too expensive to get someone else up to speed on it and I'm better off starting a "Version 2" development with whatever new requirements need to be met. (The new system is cheaper than the old system plus new requirements.) If I were confronted with some legacy C code someone wanted to leverage into an Ada project through conversion, that would be my gut reaction - probably it is cheaper to build it over again with *new* requirements that reflect everything we want than it would be to translate the old stuff and keep hammering on it to try to get whatever additional capabilities are needed. But occasionally, there may be oddball cases. :-) MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com "SteveD" wrote in message news:kisM8.144693$ux5.185603@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net... > > I think you would agree that a C to Ada translator is technically feasable. > Whether or not anyone would want such a beast is another matter. It is > unlikely that anyone would fund such an effort but... stranger things have > happened. >