Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Assembler Programming - Costs versus Benefits Message-ID: <7160@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 29 Nov 90 11:51:08 GMT References: <1990Nov25.040121.10773@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <1990Nov25.233007.19698@cs.umu.se> <7139@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1990Nov27.004859.16630@cs.umu.se> <7150@sugar.hackercorp.com> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 22 In article cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes: > A correct 68000 program runs unchanged on a 68030. Ah, then explain why Atari ST programs don't run on a 68020. There are lots of instructions that work differently between the 68000 and 68030, and any program that uses them will behave differently on different machines. Oh, you can say "but those aren't correct 68000 programs", which is all well and good but in the real world these instructions exist and are percieved as being useful to the sorts of folks who write manic games in assembler. Basically, writing a portable program is harder the lower the level you write the program at. If you do everything through intuition in C, you're unlikely to cause headaches for Amiga 3000 users. If you do everything in assembly, it's a lot harder to keep all the differences between the different processors straight... because they become exposed to the programmer. I'm not saying "it's impossible to write a portable 68000 program in assembly", but rather "it's a whole lot harder to write one". Quit with the theoretical BS and look at the real world. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .