On February 4, 2016 6:04:49 AM CST, [email protected] wrote: >> Plan 9 assembly is nice because it looks mostly the >> same, and the simple addressing modes are mostly consistent, but it's >> far from being really consistent between architectures. > >Personally, I agree with the view that trying to generalise assemblers >across platforms is chasing a chimera. I loved the Univac assembler I >cut my teeth on and nothing has ever given me even a hint of the >comfort I found there. But I got used to the 8088 assembler and >managed to do some convincing work with it (I won't list the number of >issues I thought were total mindlessness by a crowd of engineers with >no visible theoretical background). > >On today's platforms, assembler is not an option, it is a nightmare. >Add all the hardware trickery that belongs to microprocessors, not to >an adult computer, doesn't make anything more palatable. Really, why >should the job of arranging memory on start up belong in the kernel >and not in a piece of dedicated logic that gets the job done and then >gets out of the way permanently, preferably switches off? > >One of these day some hardware engineer will figure a way to move the >logic of the power supply into the CPU. No, wait, we already have >voltage selections at different temperature as a kernel function, I >believe! > >Bottom line? Bless the Go Gods for having successfully subverted much >of this nonsense by providing a cross-platform development tool that >actually does what it says on the tin, despite efforts by the hardware >suppliers to relegate software development (the real thing, not >kid-scripting - or is it script-kidding?) to the smallest viable elite >of life-challenged droids. >
*cough* that's what people said about Java *cough* >I really do feel better now, doctor! > >Lucio. -- Sent from my Nexus 5 with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
