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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a24:4e89:: with SMTP id r131mr3900671ita.4.1554645964748; Sun, 07 Apr 2019 07:06:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:3c55:: with SMTP id j82mr12326325oia.84.1554645964196; Sun, 07 Apr 2019 07:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!b2no125815itd.0!news-out.google.com!r82ni484ita.0!nntp.google.com!b2no125812itd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 07:06:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=96.255.209.31; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.255.209.31 References: <4s8rud$9j3@tribune> <1ae2b744-f80b-4450-b8d3-7b49fca01f15@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Why couldn't an operating system be written in ada From: Optikos Injection-Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2019 14:06:04 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56095 Date: 2019-04-07T07:06:03-07:00 List-Id: On Sunday, April 7, 2019 at 6:35:39 AM UTC-4, Nick Roberts wrote: > On 07/04/2019 05:32, Optikos wrote: >=20 > > Why can't LLVM be your PXC? LLVM already is your PXC and already built= out your Realizors for a plethora of ISAs. >=20 > It is a very good idea, and I'll look into it. >=20 > However, I should point out that there are a few fundamental differences= =20 > in what LLVM supports and what PXC would need to do. What I think I=20 > would need to do is to make some adaptations to LLVM to be able to use=20 > it. I suspect I'd need to make a fork. But it might be possible. >=20 > Many thanks You might be correct that LLVM as it stands ill serves Ada regarding a few = microfeatures of Ada that have not yet appeared in the other LLVM-based lan= guages (e.g., Clang, Flang). This was certainly true of C/C++'s GIMPLE in = GCC when GNAT's upper Ada-semantics layer was bolted onto C-/C++-centric GI= MPLE by Richard Stallman & Robert Dewar via the tree transducer around 1994= . Although they initially thought that they found 11 gaps in GIMPLE that A= da needed, in the end they found that there existed a half dozen or so micr= ofeatures of Ada that were not already microfeatures of C/C++ down deep. Y= ou (or Shark8 in his new Ada compiler named Byron) might find a similar qua= ntity of new territory for LLVM for which Ada is an unforeseen stressor on = LLVM's assumptions and on LLVM's current scope-of-work. Part of me thinks that you are biting off more than you can chew. But ther= e is another part of me that says, =E2=80=9CWell, I would have likewise sai= d exactly the same thing about Linus Torvalds rewriting Minix at the start = of his life's-work project, so who am I to rain on someone else's parade?= =E2=80=9D I admire your initiative and drive. Please go forth & prosper o= n all that it takes to make your vision reality; the future of Ada needs yo= u to succeed. Speaking of Shark8's Byron, you might want to take a look at it. Edward ha= s been looking for more contributors to Byron. Perhaps you could join forc= es together. (With these hints about perhaps using LLVM and Byron, you mig= ht be further toward your goal than you currently think, when compared to s= tarting from scratch. Just food for thought & creativity.) https://github.com/OneWingedShark/Byron