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: 103376,37b5f16b9be86fec
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ada -> C translator
Date: 1997/04/06
Message-ID: <dewar.860338267@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 231097735
References: <33436B29.41C6@sema-grenoble.fr> <E833ux.337@world.std.com>
 <dewar.860115718@merv> <1997Apr4.083333.1@eisner> <dewar.860170469@merv>
 <1997Apr4.193259.1@eisner>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Larry said

<<In that case I would count that runtime library as part of the
"translation" of the Ada program into C, and it seems unlikely
to be portable for the tasking implementation.

Or does the specification of ANSI C include Posix thread calls ?>>

We were talkk
We were talking about using C instead of assembler as a translation
mechanism for Ada. Certainly if you want tasking, you will have to
program a runtime library. That runtime library might lie on top
of Posix threads, but it might well include all the threads mechanism.
For example, the FSU threads package could be ported and used. So
yes, the runtime library is most certainly part of the translation,
but there is no conceptual problem in doing a complete implementation
of the runtime library, including Ada tasking, in pure ANSI C. It
would be work, yes, of course, but there is no conceptual problem,
and you certainly do not need posix threads to be supplied in the
environment to get Ada tasking working!
b