Please Help Me - 80386 Vs MIL-STD-1750A

John McCabe <>
2 Apr 1996 23:48:24 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Please Help Me - 80386 Vs MIL-STD-1750A (John McCabe) (1996-04-02)
Re: Please Help Me - 80386 Vs MIL-STD-1750A (1996-04-04)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: John McCabe <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 2 Apr 1996 23:48:24 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: architecture, question

I have been asked to jot down a list of advantages and disadvantages
of using an Intel 386 against a GPS MA31750 (MIL-STD-1750A) processor
by the end of this week (5th April 1996).

The software will be a real-time design in an embedded system,
probably developed and cross-compiled using a UNIX box.

I am in the unfortunate position that the company I work for has built
a MIL-STD-1750A computer for use in space (i.e. using rad-hard parts)
so it is going to take some pretty good arguments really to persuade
them to let us use a 386. Having had no experience in using a 386 as
an embedded target, I'm not sure that the reasons I could come up with
myself would be persuasive enough so I'd be enormously grateful if
anyone could help me with the following:

1) The number and quality of Sun SPARC hosted 386 cross-compilers
      versus MIL-STD-1750A cross-compilers.

2) The availability of cross-compilers on other hosts.

3) Any serious problems with the compilers themselves or the customer

4) Recommendations of particular compilers.

5) Purchase cost.

6) People's general opinions on how easy it is to develop a system
      using these particular processors.

I would be particularly interested in any figures anyone has regarding
productivity (e.g. number of lines of code / day) on these processors,
particularly with respect to use of Ada.

I would be most grateful for any advice/opinions/vendor contacts that
you could provide me with.

Best Regards
John McCabe <>


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.