News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned Aerial System. Parent comment

Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by fulafel on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @01:14AM (#24489753)
Web search saver: Ada '83 spec is 338 pages (https://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=3...)

For C life is easy as you can leave things undefined with the caveat "dragons may fly out of your nose" :)

An alternative example of a small spec language might be Scheme (especially pre-R6RS): https://www.schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS/r5rs.pdf

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by kevin_thibedeau on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @03:31AM (#24490352)
Nobody wants to write 83 and the later additions are far more extensive than C99 and 11.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by fulafel on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @04:25AM (#24490656)
But k&r 2 was the point of comparison, that's c89 right?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by kevin_thibedeau on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @09:36AM (#24492559)
K&R 2 represents the bulk of the modern language. You can't be very productive knowing just Ada83.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by fulafel on Thursday September 17, 2020 @01:21AM (#24501459)
Right. But the question was historical (so I interpreted it at least).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Airbus Chooses GNAT Pro Ada for Development of Unmanned A... by lokedhs on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @04:09AM (#24490574)
Shouldn't those versions be compared to C++ though?
[ Parent | on HN ]