GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[sk]

Hi,

I have been playing with Linux kernel modules and GNAT 3.15p.

I have acheived (as in loading a GNAT built lkm and have it
say "Hi") in two ways:

1) With a C wrapper to call the Ada written module init and cleanup
2) Totally native Ada init and cleanup (and a cocktail of pragma's
and command-line arguments).

Does anyone in cla world have experience with GNAT and LKM's
and have some insights they would care to share ?

I have just downloaded the GNAT GLADE packages and started
reading the documents, so far GLADE doesn't seem to be
where I need to go.

However, is GLADE a cleaner Ada solution which retains Ada integrity
(by not using "pragma No_Run_Time" etc) ?

More relevently, is GLADE a solution to what I am trying to do ?

-- 
-------------------------------------------------
-- Merge vertically for real address
--
--     s n p @ t . o
--      k i e k c c m
-------------------------------------------------

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[Jorge Real]

For the first part of your post,

sk wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have been playing with Linux kernel modules and GNAT 3.15p.
> 
> I have acheived (as in loading a GNAT built lkm and have it
> say "Hi") in two ways:
> 
> 1) With a C wrapper to call the Ada written module init and cleanup
> 2) Totally native Ada init and cleanup (and a cocktail of pragma's
> and command-line arguments).
> 
> Does anyone in cla world have experience with GNAT and LKM's
> and have some insights they would care to share ?
> 

You can visit http://rtportal.upv.es/ to download RTLGnat. It is a porting of 
the gnat compiler for RTLinux. Your Ada program is compiled into a LKM, but take 
into account that you need to have the RTLinux modules loaded first.

Cheers,
Jorge Real.

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[sk]

jorge@disca.upv.es:

 > ... http://rtportal.upv.es/ ...

Thanks, but ...

I finally had a few moments to look at the RTLinux site
and discovered the primary documentation, "Introduction to
RTLinux" is in Spanish and sadly my knowledge of Spanish is
zero.

Also, my impression is that RTLinux is an alternative Linux
kernel and environment (?), I have no desire to rip out
my current kernel and installation so that I can play with
LKM's.

For the moment, especially since my Spanish is non-existant,
I will stick with my installed kernel etc. and watch my
Ada LKM experiment's as closely as possible.

Perhaps there are relevent documents that will help in
English (sorry for my ignorance) ?

-- 
-------------------------------------------------
-- Merge vertically for real address
--
--     s n p @ t . o
--      k i e k c c m
-------------------------------------------------

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[Georg Bauhaus]

sk <noname@myob.com> wrote:
: RTLinux" is in Spanish and sadly my knowledge of Spanish is
: zero.

It always puzzles me when I read that someone who knows English
claims that his Spanish is zero, because the languages are so close if you
look at how they are written, all the more when the subject is a
technical one. :-) Doesn't mean I'm going to say, "I know Spanish"
when I seem to have deciphered parts of an interesting Spanish text.
Have you given it a try?
For example, here is a naive "translation" from the introduction,

"Sistema operativo de tiempo real estricto."
(System operating of time real strict.)

It is at least tempting to say that it is not hard to go from
this "sentence" to a real translation. Dialects, really ;-) ;-)


-- Georg

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[sk]

Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>:

 > ... <snip> ...

Very intriguing idea :-)

However, I have fried too many brain cells attempting
to follow what a "Google" page translation is trying
to say.

Surely the "Google" translation is better than anything
I could manage with "pidgen" translation ?


 > It is at least tempting to say that it is not hard to go from
 > this "sentence" to a real translation. Dialects, really ;-) ;-)

I notice the smileys and I am tempted to take you up on the
challenge, but I suspect that I will quickly get lost in
Spanish eqivalents of "petit chou" etc. :-)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------
-- Merge vertically for real address
--
--     s n p @ t . o
--      k i e k c c m
-------------------------------------------------

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[Georg Bauhaus]

sk <noname@myob.com> wrote:
: Surely the "Google" translation is better than anything
: I could manage with "pidgen" translation ?

Not sure, I would add the capabilities of the human brain  to
the No side, as brains have been dealing with languages for some time
now, and, I venture to say, typically everyones' here.
Especially if you know French (or Latin), you might arrive at guesses
that are more educated than Google can currently hope to be. I guess.

Traduttore, traditore in Watzlawick's classic notwithstanding
(which chapter has at last confirmed my suspicion that the translation
of "actual parameter" continues to be wrong in many German texts).



-- Georg

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[sk]

Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>:

 > Traduttore, traditore in Watzlawick's classic notwithstanding
I do not have a classic education so I have no understanding of
the reference.

However, and since this is a "comp.lang.*" usenet forum ...

 > ... if you know French (or Latin) ...

... and my previous comments concerning "google" translations.

I had, a long time ago, a thought : if I studied Latin, which
I believe has a more rigid structure than English, French,
German and Spanish, could a reasonable human language
translator be developed, better than those which I have tried
on the internet ?

The idea being that any of the above 4 languages would be
translated to Latin and then translated into the desired
language ?

English  >--+               +--> English
             |               |
French   >--+               +--> French
             |---> Latin --->|
German   >--+               +--> German
             |               |
Spanish  >--+               +--> Spanish

Does Latin have a more "logical" rigid structure ? And if so,
would it be a reasonable middle language for a more universal
translator ?

Perhaps a test for authors would be something along the
lines of "English --> Latin --> English". This would seem
to be able to highlight colloquialisms that just do not cross
language boundaries.

Again, my ignorance is on display :-)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------
-- Merge vertically for real address
--
--     s n p @ t . o
--      k i e k c c m
-------------------------------------------------

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[Georg Bauhaus]

sk <noname@myob.com> wrote:
: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>:
: 
: > Traduttore, traditore in Watzlawick's classic notwithstanding
: I do not have a classic education so I have no understanding of
: the reference.

Is should have said,
http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=15&ti=1,15&hd=1,0&SC=Redirect|N&PID=26749&SA=Watzlawick,+Paul&SA=Watzlawick,+Paul&HC=27&SEQ=20040201104513&SID=3

: I had, a long time ago, a thought : if I studied Latin, which
: I believe has a more rigid structure than English, French,
: German and Spanish, could a reasonable human language
: translator be developed, better than those which I have tried
: on the internet ?

Even though I do not know Latin too well I guess that Spanish is
the language with the more "rigid" structure. Latin is certainly
not too regular, for a start, has more cases, a large number of
irregular verbs, many sophisticated (dis)placements of the parts
of a sentence etc etc. I think that 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto_history
might interest you as this is a similar project.

OT: translations (was: GLADE, Linux...)

[Marius Amado Alves]

>
>
>> Traduttore, traditore in Watzlawick's classic notwithstanding
>
>I do not have a classic education so I have no understanding of
>
>the reference.
>
Italian (Latin?) pun. Translator, traitor.

>
>English  >--+               +--> English
>
>            |               |
>
>French   >--+               +--> French
>
>            |---> Latin --->|
>
>German   >--+               +--> German
>
>            |               |
>
>Spanish  >--+               +--> Spanish
>
>
>Does Latin have a more "logical" rigid structure ? 
>
No.

Interlingual approaches to automatic translation have been in and out of 
fashion. The latest most impressive initiative is the Universal Network 
Language, with an interlingua based on English.

Re: GLADE, Linux Kernel Modules etc,

[Larry Elmore]

sk wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>:
> 
>  > Traduttore, traditore in Watzlawick's classic notwithstanding
> I do not have a classic education so I have no understanding of
> the reference.
> 
> However, and since this is a "comp.lang.*" usenet forum ...
> 
>  > ... if you know French (or Latin) ...
> 
> ... and my previous comments concerning "google" translations.
> 
> I had, a long time ago, a thought : if I studied Latin, which
> I believe has a more rigid structure than English, French,
> German and Spanish, could a reasonable human language
> translator be developed, better than those which I have tried
> on the internet ?
> 
> The idea being that any of the above 4 languages would be
> translated to Latin and then translated into the desired
> language ?
> 
> English  >--+               +--> English
>             |               |
> French   >--+               +--> French
>             |---> Latin --->|
> German   >--+               +--> German
>             |               |
> Spanish  >--+               +--> Spanish
> 
> Does Latin have a more "logical" rigid structure ? And if so,
> would it be a reasonable middle language for a more universal
> translator ?

No, I fear it wouldn't. Latin is a good deal more 'regular' in some ways 
than English (or any of the other Germanic languages), but there's still 
a lot of irregular parts. While it has more structure in some ways, this 
allows greater flexibility in other ways. Word order is a lot freer in 
Latin than in English and serves more as a hint on emphasis than core 
meaning. Latin is very much a human languages and has all the foibles of 
the others, just expressed in different ways.

Perhaps a language like lojban might work better as an intermediate 
language, but I have real doubts about _consistently_ _good_ machine 
translation becoming possible before we have some form of AI.

--Larry