Georg Wrede wrote:
In the Good Old Days (when it was usual for an average programmer to
write parts of the code in ASM (that was the time before the late
eighties -- be it Basic, Pascal, or even C, some parts had to be done in
ASM to help a bearable user experience when the mainframes had less
power than today's MP3 players), the ASM programing was very different
on, say, Zilog, MOS, or Motorola processors. The rumor was that the 6502
was made for hand coded ASM, whereas the 8088 was more geared towards
automatic code generation (as in C commpilers, etc.). My experiences of
both certainly seemed to support this.
The 6502 is an 8 bit processor, the 8088 is 16 bits. All 8 bit
processors were a terrible fit for C, which was designed for 16 bit
CPUs. Everyone who coded professional apps for the 6502, 6800, 8080 and
Z80 (all 8 bit CPUs) wrote in assembler. (Including myself.)
If we were smart with D, we'd find out a way of leapfrogging this
thinking. We have a language that's more powerful than any of C#, Java
or C++, more practical than Haskell, Scheme, Ruby, &co, and more
maintainable than C or Perl, but which *still* is Human Writable. All we
need is some outside-of-the-box thinking, and we might reap some
overwhelming advantages when we combine *this* language with the IDEs
and the horsepower that the modern drone takes for granted.
Easier parsing, CTFE, actually usable templates, practical mixins, pure
functions, safe code, you name it! We have all the bits and pieces to
really make writing + IDE assisted program authoring, a superior reality.
Right, but I can't think of any IDE feature that would be a bad fit for
using the filesystem to store the D source modules.
- Re: OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids Walter Bright
-
