Re: The HLL Temptations

"Alex McDonald" <alex_mcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:1119443969.370999.18450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

>> Did you _ analyse_ the reasons of your opinion? I mean,
>> what facts, in your experience, do show the HLLs as
>> winners? What relationship between these facts and the
>> Language.
>>
>> [The _Language_. Not the Developement environnement]
>
> Well, let's take a simple case of writing a report from a flat file.
> For that, I'd use one of the languages that makes the task trivial;
> Perl, or RPG. For functional programming; Lisp. For goal based rule
> matching, say in an expert system; Prolog. The latter I would _never_
> contemplate doing in assembler; there aren't enough lifetimes.

So, you will learn one Language for each problem.
OK, but, if you had an Assembler doing all of these,
either through "Side-Tools", or by any Code reuse
Method, what difference would it make? One: You
would not have to learn all of these dedicated
Languages, but, at most, a small Script Language,
and/or how to use a click&Go "Wizard".

Taking your last example, this is not on the fault
of Assembly Language if nobody ever wrote the Asm
version of the mechanisms, and not on the fault of
Asm, if the guy(s) who wrote "Prolog" did it as a
full HLL instead of doing it as an Assembly-Assembler
implementation.

The only possible conclusion is that the job is not
done. And the reason for that is well known: Money.


>> Also, the natural base of Programming is Assembly. So,
>> Assembly being there before the HLL, the job of proving
>> anything should be on the HLL side.
>
> The natural base of programming is language. Programming algorithms are
> defined in anything but assembler; pseudo code mainly, and most of it
> based on Algol type language constructs. Then they're translated to
> assembler, or whatever, but no-one defines programming problems and
> solutions in assembler; that limits the solution to a single
> architecture.

I do not feel concerned, in any way, by this way of
thinking the Programmation, and this does not make
any sense to me. All i know is that i cannot know
what a program will look like, before it would be
finished, or almost finished.

To me, the organisation of a Program must be done
_afterward_. Before writing, this is blowing smoke
in the wind. First the job. Second the organisation
of the job. The fact that our actual civilisations
are thinking the other way round is nothing but an
image of the fascist organisations of the societies.

The actual concepts of "Programming algorithms",
"definition of Algol type language constructs", and
anything like this you would like, are nothing but
illusion selling, to me, that reflects very well the
"US way of thinking", for example, in all areas.

For example, in the old US "Western movies", when the
cow-boy is shot down... the horse falls down, too.
After this the horse (untouched) goes on working, but,
at the second the 'Master" is killed, the horse falls.
Of course: How could the stupid worker do his job
without the Boss telling him what to do, and how?

Well...

How stupid and ridicoulous implicite ideology!...


> The first assembler was AutoCoder in around 1952; prior to that, much
> programming was on patch panels or hand cranked code. Fortran followed
> in 1954 -- a two year gap. Here's a brief Fortran history, the first
> really successful HLL;
> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/languages/fortran/ch1-1.html; you'll find
> there why they bothered. Programs in *hours*, not *weeks*. And on
> machines so small, the average mobile phone would put them in the
> shade.

This Page is just a list of no base assertions.

Were is an example of any Application that would
have taken *hours* instead of *weeks*? Were is
the Assembly version? Where is the HLL version?
What Assembler? What programmers qualifications?
How many experiments? How many programmers?


>> Let us see... "They say"... 'Basic', the Beginners'
>> Language... Fine. But where did they demonstrated
>> that the Tool would assume the claim?
>>
>
> What's in a name? Basic was a teaching aid; as a language, modern
> Basic's are more influenced by C than the original. More students start
> with Java these days in my experience.

Whatever... :)

This is probably the only one experiment that could
effectively be done, indead, in the scolar area, as
it would be quite possible, say, to teach programming
to one given class, with Asm, and with an HLL for
another class, and to compare the result...

Unfortunately this experiment, as far as can know...,
does not seem to have ever been done [i suppose that
it would have made some noise... as i am 100% convinced
that, if teached with a decent Tool -of course not TASM
or MASM...- the Asm Class would win, hands down].


> You're thinking Intel desktops.

_YES_, of course, i "think x86", and do not fell concerned
in anyway by what else around. I feel concerned with what
people use for Programming. Not by the language some
industrial used to write the program in my washing machine.
Who cares?

Also, i do not feel concerned in any way, by the "Professional
are". "Professional" means "making money". Not making a good
work, the good way. (They also answer: "Who cares?" :))


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Evolution
    ... > inline assembler and larger parts by linking to an assembler ... in the HLL. ... language, particularly in smaller projects. ... > or two instructions if you ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: "We Never Use Assembly Language"
    ... Use an array incorrectly in RosAsm, ... And that's one of the reasons HLL programming is generally more ... same applies to assembler speed. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: when to use proc
    ... > point out that these are not real 80x86 assembly language statements. ... >> first assembler only app after reading the documentation. ... But remember I come from windows programming for 10 years. ... transition to Spasm was easy since the API I allready know a little about. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Future of programming
    ... but again, let's not forget in my opinion the main purpose of programming, ... the more abstract the programming language ... code-generators, or even efficient compilers, which is not the case ... > fastest solution to the problem, then assembler is still needed. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • A Friendly review of "Windows Programming in Assemble Language" chapter 3
    ... Programming in Assemble Language". ... Basically a commersial of HLA, and its ability to bridge the gap for asm ... ressurect HLA status to an assembler and positions HLA ...
    (alt.lang.asm)