Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!att-ih!pacbell!ames!mailrus!umix!uunet!littlei!ogcvax!pase From: pase@ogcvax.UUCP (Douglas M. Pase) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: HLLs vs asm (was Re: portable "asm") Message-ID: <1607@ogcvax.UUCP> Date: 31 Mar 88 01:34:10 GMT References: <11702@brl-adm.ARPA> <243@eagle_snax.UUCP> <1988Mar27.002601.17038@utzoo.uucp> Reply-To: pase@ogcvax.UUCP (Douglas M. Pase) Organization: Oregon Graduate Center, Beaverton, OR Lines: 30 Posted: Wed Mar 30 18:34:10 1988 I (Douglas M. Pase) write: - plus it allows access to the "bare metal", etc. Henry Spencer writes: -One of C's strengths -- and a major reason for its popularity -- -is that it *does* let you get at much of the underlying machine if you -really want to *and* understand your implementation in detail. In article blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson) writes: -AND your machine happens to match C fairly well AND your implimentation -does a straitforward mapping. -C is a high level language that closely models some common -architectures. It is a mistake to think it can be used for "access to -the 'bare metal'" without specifying what 'bare metal' you are -thinking of. (Not all the world is a vax or pdp11 or 68k or spark.) K&R page 180 reads: "... Some implementations also reserve the words *fortran* and *asm*. ..." For those implementations which support ``asm'', you may insert assembler code directly into the program. That sounds like "bare metal" to me. Try putting a few asm("assembler code goes here"); statements in your code and dumping the assembler listing. If you want to argue that it's not "real ``C''" go ahead, but that's not my problem. -- Doug Pase -- ...ucbvax!tektronix!ogcvax!pase or pase@cse.ogc.edu (CSNet)