Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
On Sun, 2007-05-06 at 07:12 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
assembler is there because it is needed. if you are writing or porting
a compiler and you dont have an assembler you will end up writing one
anyway.
Assembler is there because the designers _make_ it necessary.
I think I would agree with this point 100%.
Thanks,
Roman.
Designers work in binary gate-array state tables.
Not much choice until CPU go over to optical, and can *maybe* use UTF-8 directly
as I/O in color frequency coding as well as simple on/off states.
Even then only at a hefty price.
Until then, asm's mnemonics are easier for humans to work with than octal, hex,
or binary, and there isn't much to be done about that IF/AS/WHEN you absolutely,
positively, *have to* get down to the lowest possible layer and find a
binary-only animal at that layer.
Fortunately, that 'have to' is 'damn seldom' thanks to a wide variety of
toolsets, and those who do it often are no more fussed about doing it than
having a different brand of beer now and then.
Build a CPU that 'needs no assembler' and the first thing that happens is some
contrarian will write one for it *anyway*. And/OR port forth to it.
And they will be used. But never 'forced'.
That because the second contrarian who arrives will port a 'C' compiler to it.
Any of these can be labelled ugly or inelegant - but they are the tools that get
the job done faster than most other choices.
And time - wall clock, CPU, or hours of our lives - is not just money.
Time is the scarcest, and least 'renewable' resource any of us will ever have.
So we must adapt to what we have while we invent better machines.
When machines start to adapt to US, we should become very, very wary, 'coz they
will have become smarter than we are, and they will also have become either
certifiably insane to make the attempt or clever liars to fake it.
Can't trust either of those to keep a beer keg cold...
Choices, folks. Choices!
Bill
