Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ecsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary
From: dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Re: Assembly VS HOL: Having it both
Message-ID: <1387@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Jun-85 17:59:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.1387
Posted: Mon Jun  3 17:59:07 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 03:28:07 EDT
References: <439@wdl1.UUCP> <1366@ecsvax.UUCP>, <3209@dartvax.UUCP>
Organization: Duke U Comp Ctr
Lines: 15

> Why can't we write most of the program in our favorite high-level
> language and then write critical portions of the program as subroutines
> in the local assembler?  This requires that the assembler have a way of
> 
> Chuck Simmons

First, there's the matter of subroutine calling overhead, which is
sometimes a problem.  Second, I still wind up writing in assembler.
Maybe what I should be squawking about is a better syntax for assembler
language than the traditional one...
-- 
D Gary Grady
Duke U Comp Center, Durham, NC  27706
(919) 684-3695
USENET:  {seismo,decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary