* ADA compilers @ 2005-06-03 18:55 Patty 2005-06-03 19:04 ` Pascal Obry ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Patty @ 2005-06-03 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw) I am trying to find an ADA compiler for ADA83 for a Pentium/RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 operating system platform, but have not been able to locate one so far. Anyone know of one?? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 18:55 ADA compilers Patty @ 2005-06-03 19:04 ` Pascal Obry 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty 2005-06-04 6:32 ` Martin Krischik 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Pascal Obry @ 2005-06-03 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw) "Patty" <patricia.l.addiss@honeywell.com> writes: > I am trying to find an ADA compiler for ADA83 for a Pentium/RedHat > Enterprise Linux 3 operating system platform, but have not been able to > locate one so far. Anyone know of one?? Why Ada83, are you porting an application ? Have a look at GNAT. Part of GCC and commercial support available from AdaCore. http://www.adacore.com. I'm sure there is some other compilers for GNU/Linux I'll let other answer... Pascal. -- --|------------------------------------------------------ --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE --|------------------------------------------------------ --| http://www.obry.net --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" --| --| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 18:55 ADA compilers Patty 2005-06-03 19:04 ` Pascal Obry @ 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov ` (5 more replies) 2005-06-04 6:32 ` Martin Krischik 2 siblings, 6 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Patty @ 2005-06-03 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at GNAT, but they only have ADA95. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty @ 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2005-06-03 20:37 ` Björn Lundin 2005-06-03 20:25 ` Jeff C ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2005-06-03 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) On 3 Jun 2005 12:12:01 -0700, Patty wrote: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. Egh, how to port Ada 83 to Ada 95 without Ada 95? > I have looked at GNAT, but they only have ADA95. 1. There should be no problem to port Ada 83 code to Ada 95. Incompatibilities are rather minor. 2. AFAIK, GNAT has "-gnat83" switch for Ada 83 legacy code. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2005-06-03 20:37 ` Björn Lundin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Björn Lundin @ 2005-06-03 20:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada 2005-06-03 kl. 21.21 skrev Dmitry A. Kazakov: > On 3 Jun 2005 12:12:01 -0700, Patty wrote: > >> Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. > > Egh, how to port Ada 83 to Ada 95 without Ada 95? Porting to another OS perhaps? The OP is looking for and ADA compiler for linux, not an Ada 95 compiler. /Björn Björn Lundin bnl at spray dot se ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2005-06-03 20:25 ` Jeff C 2005-06-03 20:27 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Jeff C @ 2005-06-03 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw) Patty wrote: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at > GNAT, but they only have ADA95. > The issues involved with an update from Ada 83 to Ada 95 are <<= any issues you will run into with simply porting code from one compiler/os to another. If the existing code makes use of a lot of vendor specific packages and it does not encapsulate it well, this will be a bit of work. In any case if I were doing a bid (and I've done lots of them) the port from Ada 83 to Ada 95 would probably not even how up in the last digit compared to any other issues associated with the port. What can be a bit more difficult (situation I have been in for a long time) is when you need the same (or mostly the same) codebase to be backwards compatible with the old compiler for some time. The only trouble in this case is just verifying from time to time that you did not "leak" any ada 95 features into your code base. In any case I've got about 150K SLOC of Ada 83 that I also use with an Ada 95 compiler (with Ada 83 being the primary compiler still for a variety of reasons) and I've only got 1 file that is branched to make the Ada 83 work with the Ada 95 compiler because it is Ada 95 (note there are 5 or 6 other branched files but these are branched due to some vendor specific library issues or other areas that are due to vendor differences and not Ada language revision differences). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2005-06-03 20:25 ` Jeff C @ 2005-06-03 20:27 ` Chris Albertson 2005-06-03 20:31 ` ADA compilers Keith Thompson ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Chris Albertson @ 2005-06-03 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada --- Patty <patricia.l.addiss@honeywell.com> wrote: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at > GNAT, but they only have ADA95. > > _______________________________________________ > comp.lang.ada mailing list > comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org > http://www.ada-france.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada > Chris Albertson Home: 310-376-1029 chrisalbertson90278@yahoo.com Cell: 310-990-7550 Office: 310-336-5189 Christopher.J.Albertson@aero.org KG6OMK __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2005-06-03 20:27 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson @ 2005-06-03 20:31 ` Keith Thompson 2005-06-03 20:36 ` Björn Lundin 2005-06-04 5:29 ` Jeffrey Carter 5 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Keith Thompson @ 2005-06-03 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) "Patty" <patricia.l.addiss@honeywell.com> writes: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at > GNAT, but they only have ADA95. Most valid Ada 83 programs are valid Ada 95 programs with the same semantics. Most of the exceptions (such as using new keywords as identifiers) are easy to fix. Try compiling the application with GNAT (or with any Ada 95 compiler). You're likely to run into more problems going from one compiler to another than going from Ada 83 to Ada 95, especially if the program uses any compiler-specific features -- and you're going to have to fix those problems anyway. Since Ada 83 compilers are, for the most part, no longer being maintained, you might not be able to find one that works with a newer operating system. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2005-06-03 20:31 ` ADA compilers Keith Thompson @ 2005-06-03 20:36 ` Björn Lundin 2005-06-04 5:29 ` Jeffrey Carter 5 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Björn Lundin @ 2005-06-03 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada 2005-06-03 kl. 21.12 skrev Patty: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at > GNAT, but they only have ADA95. > We have ported a fairly large system from Ada83 to Ada 95 (Ie using an Ada 95 compiler on Ada83 code) with hardly no problems. The things to watch out for is if you have variable names that are the same as the new reserved words that Ada 95 brings. Ie you cant have a variable called 'aliased' since that is a reserved word now. We are using Gnat now, and had troble with some applications due to circular dependencies, with the resukt that the Gnat compiler refused to link the application. The 'difficult' application contained heavy use of tasking, in combination of a great deal of generic packages. The old compiler said OK, and so did other Ada 95 compilers. Minor rewrite solved it. A BIG difference with Gnat and other compilers are the way the Ada library a is handled. We used it a lot, having several libraries in the same level, but not able to see each other. ie global level2-1 level2-2 level3 level2-3 where the ones on level2 could all see global, but not each other. Level3 could see level2-2 and global but not the others Of course, having different packages, with the same name, in all level2's is common in our system. Tcl-script reading flat file'repository' based on current working directory, and use of environment variables ADA_INCLUDE_PATH and ADA_OBJECT_PATH made it possible to make it work, without having to use several projectfiles. This was the biggest challege Then of course, packages using vendors spcifics, as how to get the command line, tasking policies etc will differ. Another thing to watch out for, if tasking is inviolved, is how the old compiler created tasks. Is it run by the os like threads or locally in the runtime? This changes the way you can interact with blocking io. We got a big boost using Gnat, because it made it possible to use blocking io, instead of polling. This was on Aix, but compiled and linked and tested (very very little) on Linux and mac os X as well /Björn Björn Lundin bnl at spray dot se ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2005-06-03 20:36 ` Björn Lundin @ 2005-06-04 5:29 ` Jeffrey Carter 5 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Carter @ 2005-06-04 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw) Patty wrote: > Yes, we are trying to port an existing application. I have looked at > GNAT, but they only have ADA95. I have used GNAT to develop Ada-83 code. In fact, I had to do so again only a couple of weeks ago. The -gnat83 switch turns GNAT into an Ada-83 compiler. Note that it's Ada, a woman's name, not the American Dental Association. -- Jeff Carter "Oh Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." Monty Python and the Holy Grail 24 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers 2005-06-03 18:55 ADA compilers Patty 2005-06-03 19:04 ` Pascal Obry 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty @ 2005-06-04 6:32 ` Martin Krischik 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Martin Krischik @ 2005-06-04 6:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Patty wrote: > I am trying to find an ADA compiler for ADA83 for a Pentium/RedHat > Enterprise Linux 3 operating system platform, but have not been able to > locate one so far. Anyone know of one?? Well you can use gnat with the "-gnat83" option. Martin -- mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20050603202720.13734.qmail@web32807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>]
* Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 [not found] <20050603202720.13734.qmail@web32807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> @ 2005-06-03 20:32 ` Chris Albertson 2005-06-04 0:10 ` Keith Thompson ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Chris Albertson @ 2005-06-03 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada Sorry aout the last message hadno text. Here is is again I'm curious, will ada83 programs not compile under ada95? If there is a problem where is it? What part of the language spec changed in an incompatable way? Yes I do have some old code that currently runs on a VAX and I'm like to get it running on a Duel Xeon system under Solaris 10. I assumed only minor work would be required. I think gnat has a switch to disallow the '95 syntax. I would not want to use an old compiler, so much work has been done in recent years it would be a shame not to take advantage of it Chris Albertson Home: 310-376-1029 chrisalbertson90278@yahoo.com Cell: 310-990-7550 Office: 310-336-5189 Christopher.J.Albertson@aero.org KG6OMK __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 2005-06-03 20:32 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson @ 2005-06-04 0:10 ` Keith Thompson 2005-06-04 5:34 ` Jeffrey Carter 2005-06-06 12:24 ` Marin David Condic 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Keith Thompson @ 2005-06-04 0:10 UTC (permalink / raw) Chris Albertson <chrisalbertson90278@yahoo.com> writes: > Sorry aout the last message hadno text. Here is is again > > I'm curious, will ada83 programs not compile under ada95? > > If there is a problem where is it? What part of the language spec > changed in an incompatable way? [snip] The biggest change is the new reserved words that Ada 83 programs might use as identifiers. (That's actually not a very common problem, as far as I know). The best way to find out is to try compiling the code with an Ada 95 compiler and read the error messages. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 2005-06-03 20:32 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson 2005-06-04 0:10 ` Keith Thompson @ 2005-06-04 5:34 ` Jeffrey Carter 2005-06-06 12:24 ` Marin David Condic 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Carter @ 2005-06-04 5:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Chris Albertson wrote: > If there is a problem where is it? What part of the language spec > changed in an incompatable way? Yes I do have some old code that > currently runs on a VAX and I'm like to get it running on a > Duel Xeon system under Solaris 10. I assumed only minor work > would be required. I think gnat has a switch to disallow > the '95 syntax. I've compiled lots of Ada-83 code with Ada-95 compilers and never had a serious problem. The important thing is that the code was designed to be portable in the first place. If you have lots of compiler or platform dependencies in your code, it becomes harder. -- Jeff Carter "Oh Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." Monty Python and the Holy Grail 24 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 2005-06-03 20:32 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson 2005-06-04 0:10 ` Keith Thompson 2005-06-04 5:34 ` Jeffrey Carter @ 2005-06-06 12:24 ` Marin David Condic 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2005-06-06 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) I've ported a LOT of VAX/VMS (DEC) Ada 83 to Gnat Ada95 and never encountered anything that was a problem between the two language versions. There may be some obscure corner-case rules that trigger incompatibilities but in practical use, I just never encountered any. I did get some warnings about using the package ASCII and maybe that's as close to an incompatability as I've seen. Mostly, I had some issues where different compiler writers had different views of what to implement. A few instances where DEC Ada handled unconstrained types differently from Gnat Ada and, of course, some vendor specific implementation details once in a while (like packages that may or may not be there because they are vendor supplied) but two observations: I don't recall anything that got past the compiler that ended up being an issue - so the compiler is your friend here. I don't recall anything that didn't run just fine when it finally linked. I *have* had problems when porting between two *different* platforms - mostly with byte-sex issues, but that has been minimal. (Ada 95 has some features to help you out making byte-sex issues portable as well, but I have not delved into them lately) Porting even a large body of Ada code (if reasonably well written to be portable - no fair throwing in compiler-specific things in every unit & expecting zero effort) even across platforms has not been much of an issue in my experience. I've done a few hundred thousand lines in a couple of days & had it up and running - but it was *my* code so I was familiar with it and I have usually had the wisdom to isolate any compiler specifics. Even a stranger's code being moved across platforms and to a different language standard ought to be minimal fuss. MDC Chris Albertson wrote: > Sorry aout the last message hadno text. Here is is again > > > I'm curious, will ada83 programs not compile under ada95? > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried." -- G. K. Chesterton ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-06 12:24 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2005-06-03 18:55 ADA compilers Patty 2005-06-03 19:04 ` Pascal Obry 2005-06-03 19:12 ` Patty 2005-06-03 19:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2005-06-03 20:37 ` Björn Lundin 2005-06-03 20:25 ` Jeff C 2005-06-03 20:27 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson 2005-06-03 20:31 ` ADA compilers Keith Thompson 2005-06-03 20:36 ` Björn Lundin 2005-06-04 5:29 ` Jeffrey Carter 2005-06-04 6:32 ` Martin Krischik [not found] <20050603202720.13734.qmail@web32807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> 2005-06-03 20:32 ` ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 Chris Albertson 2005-06-04 0:10 ` Keith Thompson 2005-06-04 5:34 ` Jeffrey Carter 2005-06-06 12:24 ` Marin David Condic
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox