Re: A89: Which is better?

To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: Re: A89: Which is better?
From: "Kevin Goodsell" <goodsell@bridgernet.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:49:12 -0600
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


I very strongly disagree with the idea of assembly being easier to read than
C. I think it all depends on how you write your C. Good C is easy to read.
Good assembly is somewhat difficult to read. Bad C is impossible to read.
Bad assembly is worse.

-Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Zeljko Juric <zjuric@utic.net.ba>
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: A89: Which is better?


>
>Hi!
>
>> i cant ever imagine finding assembly easier then C... (in most respects)
>C
>> seems alot like basic to me. and its especially easy after learning
>> cgi/perl. they seem almost the same...
>
>Generally, C is easier than ASM, but C programs may be much more cryptic
>than ASM programs, e.g. C programs sometimes may be absolutely
>ununderstandable. It is not hard to write such programs, but it is
>very hard to read and understand them. That's why C is sometimes
>called "write-only language".
>
>Zeljko Juric
>
>