Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!cs.umu.se!dvljhg
From: dvljhg@cs.umu.se (J|rgen Holmberg)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Assembler Programming - Costs versus Benefits
Summary: I just love seeing my own voice.
Keywords: development time, porting time, hardware upgrade cycle
Message-ID: <1990Nov25.233007.19698@cs.umu.se>
Date: 25 Nov 90 23:30:07 GMT
References: <1990Nov25.040121.10773@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>
Sender: news@cs.umu.se (News Administrator)
Organization: Dep. of Info.Proc, Umea Univ., Sweden
Lines: 21

I agree that large projects generally should not be written in assembler.
Projects running into 2 years or more are not the norm though. Most programs
out there take less to write ( and infinity to maintain ) and there are times
when assembler is necessary. Try and write a fast shoot'em up in C or higher
level languages. You can write most of it in C, but not all. In such a case
the obvious choice would be to write the main code in C, the editors and help-
programs in C and optimize graphic display routines in assembler. This might
even allow for multitasking shoot'em ups.
I would love to do all coding with an icon-based program generator. But by the
time I have a machine that will run such programs at a speed that allows me
to do that I will want to write programs that it can't run fast enough.
Using Amigavision I can write stuff that I dreamt of doing on my spectrum but,
alas, I don't want to.

Jorgen
 
-- 
*******************************************************************************
email dvljhg@cs.umu.se - other ways to communicate are a waste of time.
Everything I say is always true, just apply it to the right reality.
"Credo, quia absurdum est."