Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!munnari.oz.au!murtoa.cs.mu.oz.au!ditmela!latcs1!stephens From: stephens@latcs1.oz.au (Philip J Stephens) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: languages used with commercial software Message-ID: <7494@latcs1.oz.au> Date: 24 Mar 90 05:14:18 GMT References: <9003232001.AA00592@apple.com> <12423@smoke.BRL.MIL> Organization: Comp Sci, La Trobe Uni, Australia Lines: 49 In article <12423@smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: > There are so many drawbacks to coding in assembler (as compared to a > higher-level language, C in particular) that there are only two reasons > you should do it: > > (1) For certain operations it may be necessary to work at that > level. > > (2) There may be cases where it is essential to squeeze as much > speed as possible out of a given computer. (3) Coding in assembler _can_ be fun. Come on guys, maybe you don't ever want to write assembly code for a VAX or a Pyramid; but an Apple ][ machine is different. It's no big deal to develop programs in 6502 assembler on an Apple ][+, for instance; particularly if you want to write an arcade game running at 1 MHz. A lot of people will still try and write most of an arcade game in AppleSoft or Pascal for instance, and only code the low-level graphics routines in assembler. But it's overkill! Once you've coded the graphics subroutines, the rest of an arcade game is typically only a few hundred instructions at most. Big deal! I enjoy fiddling around with machine code, if only because it's more of a challenge and more satisfying. If I'm lazy, I'll write it in AppleSoft or Turbo Pascal. If I'm feeling adventurous, I'll use assembly language. People who say you should never write in assembly unless you have no other choice are quite often reciting what they've learnt in Computer Science classes. (I'm not refering to the poster here!!! This is from past experience). Those Apple hackers that have been writing 6502 code since year 10 onwards would tend to beg to differ. I am one of those people. As far as I'm concerned, 6502 assembly is just another language. A low-level language, yes, but a language nevertheless. When you have been using it as long as I have, the "difficulty" in programming 6502 code pretty much disappears in a puff of smoke. Along with all of the so-called disadvantages. Obviously there is a limit on the _size_ of assembly you'd want to write before it became too unwieldy, but the same applies for high-level languages. Any program above 10,000 lines of code in either language is just too much. In short, assembly has it's place. It's just that with faster and more powerful machines appearing, there is less _need_ to use it. I still have my Apple ][+. It stills runs at 1 MHz. Hence I still write in assembly. It's as simple as that. < Philip J. Stephens >< "Many views yield the truth." > < Hons. student, Computer Science >< "Therefore, be not alone." > < La Trobe University, Melbourne >< - Prime Song of the viggies > <\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/><\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/>