Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) Newsgroups: net.works Subject: Re: Fie on assembly language? Message-ID: <448@terak.UUCP> Date: Fri, 15-Mar-85 13:10:28 EST Article-I.D.: terak.448 Posted: Fri Mar 15 13:10:28 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 20-Mar-85 03:56:17 EST References: <792@topaz.ARPA> <836@ames.UUCP> <425@terak.UUCP> <633@mako.UUCP> Organization: Terak Corporation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA Lines: 36 > What kills assembly is LIFE-CYCLE costs, > which include maintenability, (ever try to modify a 1000 line assy program > module that has little or no comments?) ... No worse than modifying a 1000 line C program module that has little or no comments. And C programs seldom are commented as well as assembly programs. > Ten assy coders will write ten different > ways, and none will understand the others' work without a great deal of time > and effort. Ten C coders will write ten different ways, too. It's a trait of programmers, not the choice of language. > Another way of looking at HLLs is that they enforce a certain set > of programming convention upon all users ... In other words, HLLs allow marginally competent programmers to succeed where they would have failed if they had to deal with assembler. Actually, I agree with that concept, and I even laud it. It means that "otherwise hopeless" turkeys are able to do the drudge programming like mailing-label programs, leaving me free to work on interesting stuff. > assembly code has only one place: where run-time > space or time considerations are the OVERRIDING concern. Agreed. If only more people recognized that there are indeed programs for which space and time considerations *are* an overriding concern... > Nobody has mentioned portability -- maybe that's become a non-issue? -- Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug