[comp.misc] Assembler vs. HLL

amos@nsta.UUCP (Amos Shapir) (08/03/87)

In article <3664@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo Schwab) writes:
> ... However, once you have the
>basic algorithm down, your next step should logically be to translate that
>algorithm into assembly by hand.  Compilers can do a good job, but never as
>good as a human.
>
>	I point to accomplishments of the past.
> [examples of small & efficient assembly programs]

Have you  seen the  output of  a *recent* compiler?  Some of  the modern
compilers compile into  code no human could keep track  of. On the other
hand, have you ever tried to maintain a programming project in assembly,
or port  it to a  different architecture (I  mean a *real*  program, not
something that can fit in 4k)?

>	Final note:  This is not a personal attack.  I simply feel that
>assembly code should be used more often than it is currently.

The increasing power of processors and the decreasing price of memory on
one hand, and the growing  number of different architectures (RISC etc.)
on the other  hand, supply both the incentive and  the means for writing
better HLL  compilers. It  is most  probable that  you'll see  much less
assembler programming in the coming years, not more.

Just a small  example of the trend:  SUN are in the  process of changing
the processor architecture of their  machines; do you suppose they could
even  think of  doing that  if most  of their  software were  written in
assembler?
-- 
	Amos Shapir			(My other cpu is a NS32532)
National Semiconductor (Israel)
6 Maskit st. P.O.B. 3007, Herzlia 46104, Israel  Tel. +972 52 522261
amos%nsta@nsc.com @{hplabs,pyramid,sun,decwrl} 34 48 E / 32 10 N