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