Re: Ada to Ada Translator ?

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

foo wong <crap@spellingbeewinnars.org> writes:

> If a small company wanted to create an instrument with Ada embedded on
> let's say an ARM based circuit board, there is just so much non-sense
> to deal with in the Ada world and it's just so much easier with C++.
>
> Adacore is our leader in the free software world and they are leading
> us into the abyss.

Not sure that it's really AdaCore's job to do this; there's a publicity
issue. Maybe the Ada Information Clearinghouse/Ada Resource Association
(https://www.adaic.org) would be a better place? I suspect it's
lightly-staffed.

> We really need another compiler. One that is doesn't play license
> games and that is designed to solve the problem Ada was created for,
> embedded parallel hardware use.

Technically
-----------

It's not the compiler, it's the RTL. The FSF native compiler (which you
would get with e.g. Debian) has no licence games beyond what the FSF GCC
Runtime Exception requires (i.e., practically none).

The CE arm-eabi compiler comes with full-GPL RTLs. However, the
compiler is fully capable of compiling a different RTL, and the tools
will happily work with it.

I started working on my Cortex GNAT RTS[1] because of concerns,
expressed here, similar to the ones you raise (and because it's fun). It
has the FSF Runtime Exception (it has to be GPL-based, because it's
derived mainly from the FSF RTS) and runs over FreeRTOS[2], which
(thankfully) has an MIT licence.

AdaCore's Ada Drivers Library[3] has a BSD 3-clause licence.

[1] https://github.com/simonjwright/cortex-gnat-rts
[2] https://www.freertos.org
[3] https://github.com/AdaCore/Ada_Drivers_Library

Practically
-----------

All very well having a compiler and RTS that could be used to develop
your proprietary product, but if you aren't aware of it you'll choose
C++.

I can't see AdaCore announcing that you can use their CE toolset with
this other RTS, but they can't support it for free (or at all)