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