From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,26aa6d7095c151 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-24 07:56:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!server3.netnews.ja.net!server5.netnews.ja.net!news.ncl.ac.uk!not-for-mail From: Colin Paul Gloster Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Porting from Modula-2 to Ada Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:51:00 +0000 (UTC) Organization: University of Newcastle upon Tyne Message-ID: References: <3DAFC542.152C0EE0@lml.ls.fi.upm.es> <3DAFEE75.9BF44775@ACM.org> Reply-To: Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org NNTP-Posting-Host: syrah.ncl.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk 1035471060 25438 128.240.149.75 (24 Oct 2002 14:51:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@newcastle.ac.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:51:00 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) X-Complaints-Info: Please send any complaints about misuse to: abuse@newcastle.ac.uk Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30101 Date: 2002-10-24T14:51:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Pat Rogers wrote: ""Nicolas Cail�n Paul Gloster" wrote in message news:3DAFEE75.9BF44775@ACM.org... [..] > I noticed that in the book "Safety-critical computer systems" written > by Neil Storey and published in 1996 by Addison-Wesley with ISBN > 020 1427 877 that were more compilers available for embedded targets, > at least according to Neil Storey or the author(s) of a study looking > at Pascal; C; Ada 83; Modula 2; assemblies; and about three other > languages he referred to, Modula-2 would be preferrable to use than Ada. > What are your views on this? That is not the conclusion I would draw from the text. See for example page 224: "This factor [use of mature tools versus new ones] has implications for the use of languages such as Modula-2. From Table 9.2 it is clear that a suitable subset of Modula-2 has many of the attractive attributes associated with safety-critical software. However, the comparatively little use of this language within this field is a distinct disadvantage. Some safety-critical applications are using Modula-2 ... and perhaps, in time, sufficient experience will be gained to allow it to become a preferred language in this area." I'm not aware of the "internationally recognized safe subset" for Modula-2 that his tables (and the text on pg. 223) indicate exist. Does anyone have a reference?" I will not have access to the book again for quite some time, but I thought that he or a study he referred to advocated the Modula-2 language for ideal world use, but that in real world use it was not used enough to reassure that its compilers are good enough, so that Ada was still recommended as the favorite due to tool quality (not language) concerns. I do not remember a mention of a subset of Modula-2, but if he mentioned it, then it might be described in the study examining Pascal; C; Ada 83; Modula-2; and assemblies he referred to for one of his tables.