Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!umix!uunet!wucs1!wuphys!lel
From: lel@wuphys.UUCP (Lyle E. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Assembly for graphics
Keywords: Assembly Small Fast BETTER
Message-ID: <535@wuphys.UUCP>
Date: 7 Apr 88 06:45:31 GMT
References: <2734@crash.cts.com> <3013@gryphon.CTS.COM> <384@uvicctr.UUCP> <3108@gryphon.CTS.COM> <238@gtss.UUCP>
Reply-To: lel@wuphys.UUCP (Lyle E. Levine)
Organization: Physics Dept., Washington U. in St. Louis
Lines: 27

In article <238@gtss.UUCP> chas@gtss.UUCP (Charles Cleveland) writes:
>Now personally I prefer either typing in the machine code directly in hex, or,
>for applications that call for a high level language, using COBOL.  While I
>feel that the virtues of these techniques are being slighted in this
>discussion, I don't want to try convert anyone, as I might lose my competitive
>edge.
>
>Charles Cleveland    Georgia Tech School of Physics    Atlanta, GA 30332

I couldn't agree more!  However, I don't like hex.  I attached a few
switches from the hardware store to the A2000 bus and enter the
executable in directly in binary.  This obviously will make faster
code if the programmer REALLY knows what he is doing.  As for COBAL,
I was thinking of writing a COBAL compiler in "switch code" but
decided against.  COBAL is a nice language but is just too mathematics
oriented.  It's also too structured for a high level language. I think
I'll just stick to "switch code".

==========
IBM is a Division of Sirius Cybernetics Corporation
"their fundamental design flaws are completely hidden by their
superficial design flaws."  
			- "So Long And Thanks For All The Fish"


Lyle Levine: Paths -> ihnp4!wuphys!lel       Best way: (314)889-6379
		      uunet!wucs!wuphys!lel