«

On Sep 21, 10:07*pm, "Rosario Pulvirenti"
<NoInUsenoS...@non.usare.invalid> wrote:
> assembly is better than C or C++
> if you have a serious project
>
> C or C++ could be useful for using easy hll functions
> but the hard work has to be in assembly
>
> there is no easy way in programming computers...
> Rosario

Is this a poor attempt at a troll?

Joshua Maurice wroteÂ*:
> Is this a poor attempt at a troll?

Either that or this guy has a time machine and comes from the 80's.

--
perl -e 's;;{]``*%)}`_^[&)/#%(`&;;\
y;%^)([]/*#&`_{};.\100acghiklmopsz;;print'

On Sep 22, 8:12*am, Lucien Coffe <l...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Joshua Maurice wrote*:
>
> > Is this a poor attempt at a troll?
>
> Either that or this guy has a time machine and comes from the 80's.

HLLs existed even in the 80s

Nick Keighley wroteÂ*:

> On Sep 22, 8:12Â*am, Lucien Coffe <l...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Joshua Maurice wroteÂ*:
>>
>> > Is this a poor attempt at a troll?
>>
>> Either that or this guy has a time machine and comes from the 80's.
>
> HLLs existed even in the 80s

So OP is denying the existance of HLL? You tl;dr'd, don't you.

--
perl -e 's;;{]``*%)}`_^[&)/#%(`&;;\
y;%^)([]/*#&`_{};.\100acghiklmopsz;;print'

On Thu, 2011-09-22, Nick Keighley wrote:
> On Sep 22, 8:12*am, Lucien Coffe <l...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Joshua Maurice wrote*:
>>
>> > Is this a poor attempt at a troll?
>>
>> Either that or this guy has a time machine and comes from the 80's.
>
> HLLs existed even in the 80s

His point was, I'm sure, that people[1] argued exactly like the OP
back then, not that they were *right*.

/Jorgen

[1] People in the home computer scene, that is. Unix programmers
probably never did much assembly programming, since they had
nearby proof that you could do serious programming in C.

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

On 9/22/2011 1:46 AM, Nick Keighley wrote:
> On Sep 22, 8:12 am, Lucien Coffe<l...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Joshua Maurice wrote :
>>
>>> Is this a poor attempt at a troll?
>>
>> Either that or this guy has a time machine and comes from the 80's.
>
> HLLs existed even in the 80s

yes, but IIRC, but back in the days of MS-DOS, it was more common to
write much of ones' code in assembler.

by the time dos-extenders and similar were getting popular, most
development had shifted to C and C++ (and since then ASM has taken on an
increasingly smaller role in most apps).

Unix style OS's (namely Linux) didn't really start gaining any real
popularity on PC-style hardware AFAIK until around the mid/late 90s.


some of my project though does involve using ASM, but nearly all of it
is dynamically generated (an assembler exists in-program, and used for
assembling code at runtime). a merit of ASM though is that it is very
capable, and compiles/assembles very quickly. it currently supports x86
and x86-64, ARM and Thumb (ARM/Thumb support still needs work though).

its big drawback (fairly obvious) is that it is specific to each
combination of CPU/mode/OS/... meaning that it is not generally used for
general-purpose logic code (everything that works fine in C or C++ is
left in said languages).

mostly, it is used for specific features which can't be implemented
(effectively, or at all) at the same level as C or C++, which means
mostly reflection-related operations, and for JIT-related purposes (it
is IMO much nicer, and easier to debug, to produce ASM as output from a
JIT, rather than going directly to machine-code, and generally the
assembler is plenty fast enough that its own overhead generally doesn't
matter so much).

or such...