language-agnosticpascalvaxdo178-b

What would be more productive? Converting VAX PASCAL into GNU PASCAL or port it to perl or some other language


I have this legacy code base (Compaq PERL), about 1500 lines of code, that I need to port to Windows. I wanted to use gnu PASCAL (which I have installed and have working). I have already got our assembler (HP 64000 8051) off the VAX and on to Windows (KEIL 8051).

The director of Software engineering would like to get all products off the VAX. Here is the rub, I have tried to compile the PASCAL from the VAX on CYGWIN using gpc. There seems to be alot of things that would need to be done to get (IO and algorithmic ) equivalence from one PASCAL to the other.

I know PERL,FORTRAN,C and C++ fairly well( and JAVA but I would rather not). My question boils down to with 1500 lines of code would it be more productive to port the PASCAL code to the other PASCAL, or would it be more productive to port it to another language? VAX PASCAL was my first language in college but I haven't actively programed in it in 8 years. I work with PERL,C,C++, and FORTRAN all frequently and professionally .

I would say as far as my choice, PERL would be it if I was going to convert to another language.

What the code does is perform fills and a check sums for INTEL hex and TEX HEX image files. I am aware of the Srec 1.4 program that will work, but it is not an option,because I have to get my code qualified for DO-178B (And my company is leery of using open source code)(They have no problem with open source tools; just code).


Solution

  • Given that it is only 1500 lines of code, and that while Pascal had many virtues I/O was not one of them, I would port the whole thing to C, breaking it up into modules and writing some unit tests along the way. Porting to a new Pascal there's a big 'unknown factor' in just how compatible the different dialects are. If you port it to C you'll know by the end of the first day how long the job will take, and once you've done it you'll have it thoroughly nailed, because C will outlive us all. And I agree with Joel Neely; it will always be easy to find another C programmer to maintain it.

    Because the program is so small and is mostly I/O and integer manipulation, I don't see a role for C++ here. Not worth the extra complexity.