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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c30642befcd7bf85
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: New GNAT ports (was Re: Ada and Automotive Industry)
Date: 1997/01/08
Message-ID: <dewar.852735595@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 208472883
references: <dewar.851455793@merv> <5asvku$jtu$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
 <32D39F37.7F1F@mailgw.sanders.lockheed.com>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Karl wrote:

"We are deeply involved in a commercial product which depends heavily
on an 8051 derivative.  Over ten thousand lines of C code are being
maintained at the heart of this product.  Reliability and maintain-
ability issues have been raised.  Migrating the software to GNAT-
for-the-8051 might be a wise move for us.  Keep the group posted
as to progress."

Just so no false hopes are raised here. The discussion so far has been
solely on feasibility. That I know of, no one is working on actually
doing a GNAT port. I do not even know if there is a gcc port, let alone
a good one, which is a prerequisite before even thinking about a GNAT port.

Soi