Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ima!mirror!cca!bills From: bills@cca.CCA.COM (Bill Stackhouse) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: assembly programming prefereable to HLL programming ? Message-ID: <12037@cca.CCA.COM> Date: Wed, 7-Jan-87 11:50:24 EST Article-I.D.: cca.12037 Posted: Wed Jan 7 11:50:24 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Jan-87 04:42:28 EST References: <646@instable.UUCP> <476@atari.UUcp> <384@unc.unc.UUCP> Reply-To: bills@CCA.UUCP (Bill Stackhouse) Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge, MA Lines: 24 The deviation between programmers is very important when discussing Asm vs. HLL coding. Only a small percentage of programmers can consistently code at the same level of efficency and therefore one part of system may really scream and another may be a real pig (often this is due more to using a poor algorithim and may also be true in an HLL system). Compiler technology should allow all HLLs to have an optimizer that can be used just prior to shipping a piece of code to make the result equal to or better than and coded assembler. If there is a gripe to pick, it is with the code generators that we are forced to live with. In general, I agree that HLLs are the only way go and I can think of very few reasons to use more than 0.5% assembler in any large system. Down with assemblers and all the old generation lagnuages like COBOL, Fortran, etc. Oops! Sorry about that. -- Bill Stackhouse Cambridge, MA. bills@cca.cca.com