Assembly language > Assembly discussions

Best way to "do" assembler in POIDE

<< < (2/6) > >>

frankie:
EDIT: This message was intended for this thread http://forum.pellesc.de/index.php?topic=4644.0


While opininions are opinions and are always respectable, there some strictly technical points that are not opinable.
The theory of programming, the basic meaning of execution module, resources (memory & CPU) and speed of execution are well defined and clear.
The C language, altough it was born for 'system programming' (OS), is independent from a character output or a graphic one. The rules for good programming remains the same.
You can consider that most WIN programs use slow graphic output and bloated GUI interfaces so the effort to develop optimized code is not worth of, but this is a specifica case, the general programming rules remain unchanged.
If your icons shows up slow you can buy a most powerful machine, then the programmers will bloat more the OS adding more unusefull effects that in turn will slow again the machine, and so on....
The beginner should learn a programming language from the ground (whichever C compiler it's ok) to at least understood the meaning of variable name, its address and its value (so don't try to print the variable name as string....  ::)).
The WIN programming involves the concept of threads, concurrent processes, global data storage, access and synchronization, that are not basic concepts at all.
Everybody want make programs, nobody want waste time studying basic concepts.....  :(

akko:
Thanks to everybody for their well-meant and correct suggestions. However I am not programming for Windows (I'd probably use C# for that) but my project comprises a virtual machine (with a multitasking Forth kernel) where speed IS important (eg when compiled for a controller as target system). The project in Pelles C is the prototyping and simulation tool for it. Nearly all controller board manufacturers provide a C compiler for their board, but I can develop and test the higher level stuff much better on a PC . Once the highlevel code runs, the bottom level connection to the "bare metal" of the board(s) is very much simplified, ie when you encounter bugs you can reduce your search space dramatically.

But speed is only one aspect. Other aspects comprise the limitations of the C language. Eg it does not really make fun to program "add with carry", or modulus arithmetics of large integer numbers (C anyhow is rather peculiar about modulus of negative numbers), or somesuch in C, when you could do it better in just a few assembler lines.

But this is not the topic here, thus back to the original question:
What is the best way WHEN one has to use assembler?

CommonTater:
In my experience (which is admittedly limited) your best bet is to go all the way back to your original message and follow Pelle's advice... He wrote this stuff, nobody knows it better.
 
Again... be careful not to trip over the "premature optimization" thing. You say speed is important but are you shure it won't be just as fast in C?  There is no truth to the assumption that ASM is automagically faster and it hasn't been true since the nasty old days of Interpreters. 
 


 

Bitbeisser:

--- Quote from: CommonTater on July 26, 2012, 11:14:25 AM ---
--- Quote from: frankie on July 26, 2012, 10:48:25 AM ---Everybody want make programs, nobody want waste time studying basic concepts.....  :(

--- End quote ---

:D  Last week I couldn't spel progrimmer ... This week I are one!

--- End quote ---
c00l DuDe, mee 2....

Ralf  ;)

Vortex:
For those who have doubt about assembly, you are kindly invited to visit the the Masm forum.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page