Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucla-cs!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!waikato.ac.nz!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix!templar!jbickers From: jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Lemmings - a tutorial Part V (last) Message-ID: <1945.tnews@templar.actrix.gen.nz> Date: 6 Apr 91 01:28:57 GMT References: <781@tnc.UUCP> <1991Mar31.003933.1483@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Apr2.090315.27856@starnet.uucp> Organization: TAP, NZAmigaUG. Lines: 27 Quoted from <1991Apr2.090315.27856@starnet.uucp> by sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem): > Also the mulu #17 exaMPLE should be optimized by a macro assembler > But lets get the the question: what do C offer over a NON clasic > motorola macro assembler? Development speed. A lot of people (some of whom have formal backgrounds in Comp Sci, where they get to do silly things with PDP-11 assembler :) know this, so they never bother to get good enough with assembler to do more than optimise parts of a C program. There are few, if any, who can implement a non-trivial algorithm faster in assembler than an equally competent C programmer can in C. For a lot of people, development speed == income. > I know just a little about C, but still know how to write a simple > paint program in it.I usally read C to converte it to ASM, like I done I think (I'm not a psychiatrist or anything, so take this with some salt crystals) that you should be able to read just about any language, if a manual (so you can find out what the keywords mean) is handy. Or at least, you should be able to do this with procedural languages - so you read the C, convert that into some sort of algorithm spec, then convert that into assembler. -- *** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG. jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz *** *** "Patterns multiplying, re-direct our view" - Devo. ***