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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9e20292f693f1408
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ADA CORE TECHNOLOGIES ANNOUNCES GNAT-TO-JAVA SYSTEM
Date: 1997/09/14
Message-ID: <dewar.874240926@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 272421630
References: <dewar.873998738@merv> <34196E8E.1790@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <341A7D65.46FC@online.no>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-09-14T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Tarjei said

<<If there is a new backend will it lend itself to writing code generators
for other architectures? Eight and sixteen bit microcontrollers would be
obvious challenges.

On the other hand; after having done some reading on the 8 bit
controllers, I'm not so sure that any programming language is
particularly suitable for these devices.

At any rate it looks like tasking would be no good. There is not much
context switching that can be done in 128 bytes or less.

However devices like the Z-80 (HD-180) and 68xx should be feasible.>>

No, it will not be at all useful for this purpose, since it is entirely
JVM oriented. On the contrary, gcc itself can most certainly be adapated
for geenerating code on 8 and 16 bit micro-controllers, and indeed there
already exist gcc ports for some 16-bit micro-controllers.

So gcc as it stands is by FAR the more appropriate path if you want to
work on getting GNAT onto small machines. Whether this effort is worth
while for 128 byte machines, you have to figure out. Seems dubious to me!