Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ucbvax!usenet
From: usenet@ucbvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: assembly programming prefereable to HLL programming ?
Message-ID: <16581@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Wed, 10-Dec-86 16:46:54 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.16581
Posted: Wed Dec 10 16:46:54 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Dec-86 07:49:19 EST
References: <646@instable.UUCP> <476@atari.UUcp> <384@unc.unc.UUCP>
Reply-To: dma@euler.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Controls Wizard)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 15

Summary:if time is really critical, use hardware

the people who favor assembly language, all push how much faster it executes.
even if this is true, it isn't relevant.  you can implement the same
functions in hardware and do it even faster.  for example, i've developed
control systems (proportional plus integral control actions) for dc motors
in c, assembly language and in hardware (designing a digital circuit).  the
c code took the least time and was slightly slower than the assembly language
code.  the hardware design took slightly less time to develop than the
assembly language code but was an order of magnitude faster.  assembly language has it's place, but there aren't any universals as to what's .  most of
my software needs to be highly transportable so i generally use FORTRAN.  it
may not be elegant, but everyone has it.  i use c for programs i'll be the
only one to use.  assembly language is fine for real time applications, althoughhardware implementations are preferable for linear problems.  knowing how to
do all of these (at least having a "functional literacy" in all) is more useful
than allowing prejudices to interfere with real productivity.
From: dma@euler.Berkeley.EDU (Controls Wizard)
Path: euler.Berkeley.EDU!dma