On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Or he digs into his tool box and pulls out a subroutine to do it (ie: > The equivalent of your OS/PD implementation). If the C Programmer is > allowed to cheat by using a pre-existent and debugged set of code (in > lieu of creating it from scratch), so can the Assembler Programmer. > Remember you say experienced with means that the Assembler Programmer > has code that can be reused/recycled. >
Cheating is always encouraged :-), but I think that the point was that neither programmer had such a routine "in his toolbox". The C programmer will find something that is easily reused, the assembler guy probably won't. Will the C routine run as fast as hand-crafted assembler written by a great programmer? Probably not. But a mixed Assembler/C programmer will have more time to design and analyze the system and then rewrite the performance critical sections in assembler if necessary (and assuming that the C compiler isn't just as good). Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com PS> Sure, its heresy to criticize assembler on this list. I simply believe that most assembler programmers should consider learning/using C since there are tools (Metal-C, Dignus, etc) that I believe will allow them to develop systems in mixed C/HLASM that will be better than assembler alone. Besides, if you want to branch out and work on z Linux (or other Linuxen), then knowing C well will be a big plus.
