-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Sam Siegel Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 4:30 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: ASM vs HLL (Was: CPU: ASSM vs ENTERPRISE COBOL - SOLVED!)
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:46 PM, McKown, John <john.mck...@healthmarkets.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List >> [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Sam Siegel >> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 3:41 PM >> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >> Subject: Re: ASM vs HLL (Was: CPU: ASSM vs ENTERPRISE COBOL - SOLVED!) > <snip> >> It is a non-sequitur to say knowing a certain programing language >> makes you better at designing and implementing algorithms. Analysis >> of algorithms is more of a mathematical endeavor than a language >> endeavor. >> > > True. What I meant, sort of, was "in my experience people who know assembler also tend to be better at algorithms" I don't say it is a causal relationship, just that it seems that assembler people also tend to have stronger skills at algorithms. Personal opinion based on "gut feel". Like the perception that "geeks have poor social skills". > That makes sense in the IBM asm/cobol world. I guess the Microsoft analogy would be C programmer versus an visual basic programmer. Where, in general, the C program would be thought of as having better algorithm skills. -----End Original Message----- As a "COBOL bigot", I think it is probably true that "good assembler" programmers OFTEN create "better performing" algorithms than "good COBOL programmers". This isn't universally true (and I don't think anyone has claimed that it is). What is EQUALLY true is that often (not always) a COBOL program is designed to be "easily maintained" ("readability") and to be "patched" at 3am by someone who has never seen the code. Assembler is "readable" to Assembler programmers (just as COBOL is readable to COBOL programmers). HOWEVER, those same things that make for good (performing) Assembler programs are often the "easiest" things to miss during regular or emergency maintenance. "Good" internal documentation can help, but COBOL's (claimed whether proved or not) "self-documenting" nature does allow for "bad" but "understandable" algorithms.
