Re: Waiver question

[Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>]

Ken Garlington <GarlingtonKE@lmtas.lmco.com> writes:
> 
> Ken Garlington wrote:
> > 
> > For the TI DSP family, I know of only one Ada 83 vendor (TI/Tartan) and
> > no
> > Ada 95 vendors. The AdaIC databases confirm my understanding. There
> > appears
> > to be more than one C/C++ vendor (TI is one) for this family, however.
> > The
> > request does not cite a specific number.
> 
> I've just been told that for the TI C40 DSP, the following languages are
> available:
> 
> Ada 83 - TI (Tartan) appears to be the only vendor.
> C++    - TI (Tartan) appears to be the only vendor. However, TI (Tartan)
>          has announced that they are discontinuing support for this
> product.
> C      - TI appears to be the only vendor.

Actually, there is now a GCC port for the C30/C40 DSP.  Theoretically,
a C++ port and a GNAT port should be doable.  The C++ port should be a
matter of libraries.  I'm not sure what the effects of the C40's
minimum addressable unit being 32-bits would be on GNAT, but if that
is not a problem it is a matter of libraries and bindings.

> 
> Based on this, I would say that the growth in the C++ market for this
> target is
> not as large as the vendor believes. If anyone has different
> information, let
> me know.

Since DSP's generally perform very focused tasks that require high
performance, they are generally programmed as close to the hardware as
possible.  The C30/C40 change that since they are more general purpose
than most DSPs, so people want to replace the control processors on
boards with them.  I did a board that did signal processing and
interface control; it was around 40KLOC of C code on the C40.  But the
compiler situation for these processors has never been that great.

-- 
Corey Minyard               Internet:  minyard@acm.org
  Work: minyard@nortel.ca       UUCP:  minyard@wf-rch.cirr.com