Re: A89: ASM Mentoring
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A89: ASM Mentoring
yeah, that's my opinion. Back in the old days when computers didn't have
alot of power, games like Doom, and even Quake1 ran on 486's... the
difference of course is using ASM for the rendering and C for everything
else. of course todays machines are so fast a good C programmer can usually
replace the ASM completely. But I digress
The best way to get the most power out of your TI-89 Programming, at least
in my opinion, is to use a power filled combo ASM/C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Olle Hedman" <oh@hem.passagen.se>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: A89: ASM Mentoring
>
> From: "Matt Waters" <thefishyone@hotmail.com>
> > Yeah, I've seen people do some pretty cool things with TI-GCC. My only
> > concern is that C is much more code-inefficiant than ASM, making
programs
> > slower and bulkier. This doesn't matter much on PC's, but with a calc's
> > limited power and mem, it kinda sucks. Although I've been learning C++
for
> a
> > little while now, I don't think TI-GCC will compile programs written in
> C++.
> > Hey, if you'd be willing to teach me to program C for the 89/92+, I'd be
> > willing to teach you what I know about the 68k.
>
> The difference isn't really that big if you are a good C programmer. But a
> lousy coder will probably generate larger code then needed, both in C and
in
> asm, but even larger in C.
> A good C programmer will probably generate smaller code then a lousy asm
> programmer.
> (and it's easier to become a good C programmer then a good asm programmer.
I
> think... But it is really good to be good in asm when you learn C....)
> A smart (and good) programmer uses both C and asm wisely together and make
> both small and fast programs that is well structured and nice in all ways
:)
> I'm actually quite impressed by gcc:s good optimizeing. Both for speed and
> size.
>
> ///Olle
>
>
>
References: