TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
"Kester, Rush W." <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Kester, Rush W.
Tue, 16 May 2000 12:26:48 -0400
text/plain (82 lines)
You should check into BlueCat Linux, see
This is a POSIX compliant version of Linux with compatable versions that
run LynxOS and desktop Linux.  When I talked with the company reps. at a
"roll-out" seminar last Nov, they were not very Ada aware.  They were
very much in tune with high reliability, safety critical systems, and
good software practices.  They were interested in learning about the
Ada Linux connections.

WOW! I just searched their web site for Ada and found they have come
along way.   They now advertise partnerships with Aonix, DDC-I,
Rational, MIPS, Irvine, and GNAT Ada compiler vendors.  They even
speak DII/COE and CORBA.  :-)

Note: If you talk to them, encourage them to exhibit at SIGAda 2000   I think they have
excellent prospects in the Ada community.

Rush Kester
Software Systems Engineer
AdaSoft at Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab.
email:  [log in to unmask]
phone: (240) 228-3030 (live M-F 9:30am-4:30pm, voicemail anytime)
fax:   (240) 228-6779

> -----Original Message-----
> From: AdaWorks [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 7:05 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: "Why Not Ada"
> On Tue, 16 May 2000 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> > I had a look at ESP's website last night and I searched for
> Ada. It came up
> > with
> > 15 or so matches (most of which were Green Hills
> advertising), but I'm sure I
> > saw a list that suggested there *was* an Ada compiler
> targetted to the 8051. I
> > remember it because I was surprised to find it, but I'll
> check again tonight in
> > case I'm wrong.
> There are no Ada compilers for the I-8051.  Even if there
> were, it would
> not make much sense to use Ada for most I-8051 applications.  Most
> 8051 programs are deployed on minimal memory (anywhere from 256 to
> 2000 bytes) even though it technically can support 256,000 bytes under
> some circumstances.  Most 8051 installed applications are
> single-threaded.
> They tend to be focused on solving a single small problem in
> a minimalist
> design.  Consider a typical 8051 embedded application:  a
> simple stepper
> motor.  The sensors are simple, the actuators are simple, the program
> is simple.  The program is typically written by one person
> working from
> a sketchy specification.  Granted, there are more complex programs
> written for the 8051.  Some friends of mine, here in Silicon Valley,
> have a little company that specializes in developing 8051 software for
> medical devices.  Even those programs, though, tend to follow a set
> pattern and are much smaller than what one would expect of a typical
> Ada application.
> If we are going to promote Ada, let's focus on those platforms best
> suited to it.  In a meeting yesterday, I was advised that a group
> working on Lynx OS has decided that Ada is no longer meeting their
> needs because they have upgraded to Lynx 3.0 and they cannot find
> an Ada compiler for it.  They have been using Ada on Lynx 2.5. If
> we do not support the platforms we start out supporting, those who
> choose Ada will continue to be frustrated when they decide to upgrade
> to the next level of an operating system.
> Richard Riehle
> [log in to unmask]