comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Beard, Frank" <beardf@spawar.navy.mil>
To: "'comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org'" <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Subject: Restructuring of Ada (was RE: Ada on Cypress CY7C646 (8051)?)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:54:26 -0400
Date: 2001-06-07T13:54:26-04:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <mailman.991936511.7654.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org> (raw)


-----Original Message-----
From: Marin David Condic [mailto:marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com]

> I think the problem with subsets is quite a tangled web. Not having an
> "official" subset for small computers means that a) nobody uses Ada for
> small computers or b) at best you end up with hundreds of incompatible
> subsets. History has been more towards A. You can't get Ada for most small
> machines. Hence the guys using those sorts of small machines have no
> interest in Ada. I don't know that there is any good answer to this.
> Demanding "One and only one Ada" is a good thing in many respects, but how
> does one then make it possible to have Ada on a tiny computer?
> 
> MDC

> > "Brian Catlin" <briancatlin@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:9fmfju$43n$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
> > I know that Robert Dewar had a conniption back in '95
> > when someone suggested subsetting Ada to get it onto an
> > 8051.
> >
> >  -Brian
> >

It seems like Ada needs to be restructured a bit.  I like the idea
of having Annexes, but, as others have pointed out, they're optional.
We've had discussions in the past about adding new capabilities to
the language, whether or not to add them to the core or annexes, and
others had concerns that we would no longer have a language suitable
for embedded programming if we added the features to the core.

It seems to me that maybe we should take the approach of having the
"core" be everything needed to support embedded programming, then have
the "expanded core" be the additional features for general programming,
and then the Annexes for the specialized enhancements.

That way, Ada compilers for embedded systems would only need to support
the embedded set.  Ada compilers for non-embedded applications would
have to support through the "expanded core", and the Annexes would 
remain as they are.

Just a thought.  I'll leave it to the Ada brain-trust to consider 
the feasibility.

Frank Beard



             reply	other threads:[~2001-06-07 17:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-06-07 17:54 Beard, Frank [this message]
2001-06-07 18:43 ` Restructuring of Ada (was RE: Ada on Cypress CY7C646 (8051)?) Marin David Condic
2001-06-08  9:28   ` Philip Anderson
2001-06-08 14:01     ` Marin David Condic
2001-06-08 14:30     ` Marin David Condic
2001-06-08 18:29       ` Ada and SBC's, was: Re: Restructuring of Ada Simon Clubley
2001-06-08 19:35         ` Marin David Condic
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-06-07 20:00 Restructuring of Ada (was RE: Ada on Cypress CY7C646 (8051)?) Beard, Frank
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox