On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Nicholas Leippe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue Apr 28 2009 14:29:43 Sasha Pachev wrote: >> The issue in the post and the question about & got me thinking. With >> the arrival of more powerful hardware which made possible the >> existence of Java-like languages where the internals of the CPU >> architecture are deeply hidden, we've gained something but I think >> we've lost something as well. It is good for the programmer to be >> close to the hardware enough to feel some of the stress that his code >> puts on it. C++ is a good language to learn even if you never program >> in it for a job. > > I totally agree with the reasoning, and feel that assembly should be a > requirement simply for the understanding it provides. You think differently > when programming in any language once you've learned assembly and consider > what's happening underneath.
I agree to both. Writing the same application in asm, C, C++, Java, and Python would be an excellent exercise for students of the craft IMHO. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
