"We Never Use Assembly Language"
in [ASM]
|
From: john chung on 14 Mar 2006 12:18 Please ignore the mathematically model, not the solution for AND in all case senarios. john On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:11:25 +0800, john chung <johnzulu[at]yahoo.com> wrote: >Hmmm....... Tim needs a mind shift there.... >Assembly no more? Performance only exclusive on HLL? >It seems that Tim has forgotten the ONE rule. > >when a language is a SUBSET of another language in this >case assembly. Can a programmer write fast code for >*ANY* kind of application? He has to realize that >the language that he/she is using does NOT cater >or deem it easily to solve a problem WITHOUT the >capabilities of a bigger SET. > >For example. Try AND bitwise WITHOUT the >AND operator......... Possible mathematically with other >means but not compact enough in code wise. >*solvable by op1 - (op1-op2)* > >john > > >On 10 Mar 2006 11:44:25 -0800, "randyhyde(a)earthlink.net" ><randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >>Check out >>http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~dpw/popl/06/Tim-POPL.ppt >> >>This is a talk Tim Sweeny gave on programming languages at POPL (a very >>high-end programming languages conference) on language design goals >>that game programmers are interested it. Despite the obvious knock >>against using assembly language, it discusses several language features >>that game programmers want (and why assembly is bad). >> >>Of course, there is the quote "we will gladly give up 10% of our >>performance for 10% improved productivity." Does this also mean they'll >>give up 50% of the performance for 50% productivity? :-) Interestingly >>enough, this was in the section that discussed how important >>performance is. >>Cheers, >>Randy Hyde >
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 14 Mar 2006 13:24 Betov wrote: > > But keep 100% sure that, the day this will happend, i will > not miss to upload the list of all the insanities you have > written, here and there, about ReactOS. > And that will prove.... what? Why don't you upload them all now. We need a good laugh. But the biggest insanity of all concerning ReactOS is this: "When ReactOS becomes real, people will give up their HLLs and switch to.... RosAsm! The assembly rebirth will begin." So should ReactOS actually become a real product, and Microsoft blesses them by leaving them alone, I will humbly admit that I've made an error. OTOH, when the masses don't give up their HLLs and switch to RosAsm, as you've predicted on many occasion, I'll still get to laugh about the whole thing. After all, if history is any indication, there will be *far* more HLA users than RosAsm users on ReactOS. And the complete set of *all* assembly language programmers will still be a tiny fraction of the number of people actively writing applications for ReactOS. After all, if using assembly under ReactOS is such a great idea, why aren't they writing ReactOS itself in assembly language? As ReactOS is being written in C, and your assembler is slated to produce applications for ReactOS, doesn't this make your assembler a "C side tool"? :-) Personally, I have serious doubts that ReactOS will ever be real. It's been vaporware for *way* too long and they keep chasing a moving target. A real recipe for "don't bet your life savings on this one." Personally, I would love to see an alternative to XP as I don't particularly agree with the direction that Vista is taking. But as much as I'd like to see that happen, I'm certainly not placing any faith in the delivery of ReactOS. Cheers, Randy Hyde
From: santosh on 14 Mar 2006 13:48 randyhyde(a)earthlink.net wrote: > Personally, I would love to see an alternative to XP as I don't > particularly agree with the direction that Vista is taking. What would be some of the things about Vista that you don't particularly like? Do they happen to affect assembly programming? What "differences" would you like to see in a hypothetical alternative to XP/Vista?
From: Betov on 14 Mar 2006 14:51 "santosh" <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> ?crivait news:1142362124.897202.89930 @v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com: > randyhyde(a)earthlink.net wrote: >> Personally, I would love to see an alternative to XP as I don't >> particularly agree with the direction that Vista is taking. > > What would be some of the things about Vista that you don't > particularly like? Do they happen to affect assembly programming? How can you ask such a question to a swindler who never wrote anything in Assembly???!!! Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 14 Mar 2006 15:05
Betov wrote: > > Of course, other assemblers automatically fix this for you. > > This is one point where RosAsm is a true low level Assembler, > and where the other ones tend to fail, because they have no > concept of true Local Labels. They don't? Hmm... Sure could have fooled me. > But as you have no idea about > what a true local label is... I guess not. I never would have thought that the concept of a local label is tied to the size of a branch instruction's displacement. Then again, neither has anyone else but you. I wonder if *you've* really got the concept down? Cheers, Randy Hyde |