Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rphroy!caen!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!BROWNVM.BITNET!RKOGUT
From: RKOGUT@BROWNVM.BITNET ("R. Kogut")
Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370
Subject: Re: Postholes
Message-ID: <9104181345.AA06394@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 18 Apr 91 12:43:16 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: IBM 370 Assembly Programming Discussion List
              <ASM370@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 16

>Why do people seem to write assembler code primarily on /360? (paraphrase)

One reason might be that 360 machine language is straightforward and easy
to use compared to Intel architecture and even more so compared to RISC
architecture. For some applications, it can be more compact than C. I remember
trying to port a C program and giving up and writing it more quickly in
assembler. I'm not saying that this is the general case, but it does happen,
especially if you are dealing with fixed length character strings which
usually require one 360 machine instruction to handle rather than a function
call in C. Also, assembler language can be easier to debug, since you don't
have to worry about compiler errors (yes, I've run into them and just having
to consider the possibility of one occuring costs time) and it's easier to
trace an assembler program you've written yourself with meaningful labels
for everything than to follow an assembler listing generated by a compiler.
Although some people will use a particular language for 'religious' reasons,
if a lot of people are using one, there's probably a reason.