Michael S (already5chosen@yahoo.com) on 3/2/08 wrote:
---------------------------
>
>Sorry, Dean, I'm not with you on this one.
>I enjoy writing performance-critical routines in asm and consistently find out
>that doing so consumes _significantly_ less time than attempting to convince the
>compiler (the C compiler, other languages would be even worse) to generate the code
>exactly as I want it. However I realize that quite often I'm doing it more for fun
>than due to real need. I don't pretend that the resulting code is as maintainable
>(let's not even talk about "portable") as equally-functional C code. And I don't
>even dream about writing whole programs in assembler - it would be a waste of my time.
>Few years ago I coded a small app for tiny 8051-compatible. Did it in 100% C.

For those who write exclusively in assembler, it is just as maintainable as any other language. Portability is really the issue, of course - but in my environment there is no such thing as portability, so that is a moot point there.

We went through an exercise to determine whether we should write everything in C instead of assembler. We even brought in C compilers, and people started learning and playing with it.

Because of the expertise in the shop with assembler, C actually was less efficient in terms of developer time. With extensive use of macros (IBM's macro facility is quite advanced and flexible) and reusable modules, there was no advantage to using C for us.

So - the bottom line is, for a C expert all other languages have limitations. The same is true for an assembler expert. Yet, other languages continue to be developed and be popular. Eventually, C will be relegated to the same kind of niche as other once popular languages have been, I predict.

Regards,
Dean

>
>