Re: A92: ASM Help
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A92: ASM Help
>>3. Is ASM or C++ easier to learn in anyone's opinion?
>
>C++, no question there. Basically everything that's not assembly is easier
>to learn, and for a good reason: all other languages have been built on top
>of machine language (and/or assembly) with the intention of making it more
>human-friendly. C++ is easier than assembly, being a higher-level
>language; BASIC is easier than C++, being an even higher level (higher
>levels being farther from straight machine code). However, low level
>languages (assembly) allow you much more control over exactly what's
>happening in your program and in the system, and allow you more flexibility
>to include functions that weren't designed into the language. Also,
>writing directly in assembly sometimes earns a speed bonus because the
>programmer can streamline the operations exactly as the processor will see
>them, instead of letting another program (a compiler) do it for them.
>
Why on earth everybody say that assembly in more difficult than C++ ??
Is it more difficult to know 50 operands than around 10 000 Win32 functions ?
With assembly, you can do everything !! Not with other language
(except if they include inline assembly or objects files compiled with
an assembler)
It is true that programming in assembly often freeze the calc, but
with a debugger, I don't know where is the problem : once you
manage to see how works the processor, the memory, the I/O...
you are able to do evrything, isn't it ?
bye
Benoit
Follow-Ups:
References: