A86: Re: Assembly

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

A86: Re: Assembly


APCS Student's do learn these things right before the test but as for the
rest of the year it is bassically a need to know basis....

Sort of breaks it down and starts the new programmer at a level they can
understand. 

Kind of like how you don't need to know how to build a car in order to
use one.

In the same manner begining computer science students can use the
standard c++ functions and classes without knowing exactly how they work.
 Then later when they get more advanced they can learn how these
functions and classes are implelemented.

I personally knew about strings and linked list and all sorts of other
stuff but that is only because I went way ahead of the class.

************
 and you want to go 
>and
>screw it up by writing a compiler?
>
*************

I never said that I was going to write a compiler...

What I am planning on doing is attempting to write a converter (when I
get better in asm).  The difference between a compiler and a converter is
that the converter will output asm code instead of a program file.  I
know that I do not have the knowledge of asm to do this well now... But
when I finally learn assembly well enough I think it would be something
interesting to do...

Ask people who use Delphi and you will find that most of them know C++
but use  Delphi more often because it reduces the time that it takes to
program.  Sure it is not quite as advanced as C++ but it is designed to
be used for programs that don't need the more advanced C++ features. 
Thats why they call it a Rapid Application Development tool 


Later,

Chris

****** End of message





On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 15:44:24 -0500 "David Phillips" <david@acz.org>
writes:
>
>> AP Computer Science Students program for almost a whole year before 
>they
>> actually find out about the implementation of the classes they are 
>using.
>>  They don't start people off by showing them what is inside the
>> iostream.h file.  Instead they show them what is important at the 
>time
>> which is how to use the class.
>
>WRONG!  You sure you want to debate this?  This is all imho (meaning 
>it's MY
>PERSONAL OPINION and this not a flame), but the AP classes are the 
>worst
>teaching idea ever.  How can you go a whole year in "AP Computer 
>Science",
>take a test that's gives you college credit for the first 
>semester/year, and
>still not know to handle strings or linked lists?
>
>I was lucky enough to have taken AP comp sci back when it was still in
>Pascal.  And you know what?  I know exactly what a linked list is, 
>what a
>string is, what a binary search tree is, how to use them and how to 
>program
>them.  If you can program them, then you can most certainly program 
>them.
>Anyone can use a class that someone built for him/her, but if they 
>don't
>know how they work, then how can they efficiently use them?
>
>If you can't write the code, you should't use it.  I'm a firm believer 
>in
>that.  Write and understand have a very thin line, if that is what 
>hangs you
>up.  I'm not saying you shouldn't use the OpenGL drivers because you
>couldn't write fully optimized code like that.  But if you don't 
>understand
>the basics of 3D, then you have no business using a graphics API to 
>write a
>3D program.  Same way with asm, or anything else.  If you couldn't 
>write the
>same FUNCTIONAL code, then you shouldn't use it, either.
>
>Btw, I use very few rom calls.  People like to use them a whole lot.
>They're fine for normal programs, but if it's a game, I prefer to 
>write them
>myselfm because they're a heck of a lot faster and because I can.  If 
>I
>couldn't have written it, I don't use it.
>
>> I feel that creating such a tool that would allow for easier 
>functions
>> and commands, but still converting to asm would be a great idea as 
>it
>> would not only introduce newbies to the power of assembly, but would 
>also
>> give the experience asm programmer a way to create a fast solution 
>to the
>> problem at hand.  Giving them a program to work with and tweak.
>
>Introduce newbies to the power of assembly?  You've played ZTetris and
>Sqrxz, right?  Then you know the power of assembly.  I have an idea.
>Seriously.  Download David Boozer's "Hacking the TI-85".  It was 
>written in
>August of 1994 and can be found in ticalc.org's text archives.  Then,
>download ZShell 1.0, found in the old 85 shells at ticalc.org.  Read 
>through
>the docs in that.
>
>Now tell me you need a tutorial to hold your hand through asm.  Still 
>not
>convinced?  Read David Ellsworth's TI-85 and TI-92 bugs text file, 
>found at
>ticalc.org in the text section.  Very similiar to David Boozer's file.
>
>If you don't know asm, you aren't going to be able to write a 
>compiler.  Not
>possible at all.  Even if you managed somehow to write one, anything 
>it
>created would be awful.  I'll admit, I wanted to do the EXACT same 
>thing
>when I started.  Then I decided to get off my butt and learn asm.  
>Guess
>what?  It's not so hard, fun and well worth it.
>
>Why do I feel so strongly about this?  Maybe I'm a programming purist.
>Computers, to the state that they have evolved, are very poor, at 
>least in
>software quality.  Sure, there's quality.  Load up VC++, push a few 
>buttons
>and you have a full featured text editor.  Darn, that took a lot of 
>effort.
>And do you know it works?  No.  Do you know why?  Of course you don't. 
> All
>you know is that your computer that is 100 or more times faster than 
>that
>8088 you had when you were in gradeschool boots up slower and crashes 
>more
>often.  You have more hard drive space than was imaginable 20 years 
>ago, and
>it's full of worthless, slow, buggy crap.
>
>Now, you have a almost-perfectly designed Z80 machine with 128k ram 
>(so it
>has a few quirks, has to be a challenge somewhere :) and are graced 
>with a
>full host of development tools, emulators and documentation, allowing 
>you to
>easily and fully enjoy programming it in assembly, and you want to go 
>and
>screw it up by writing a compiler?
>
>
>

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Follow-Ups: References: