Re: Which programming Language
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:24:32 -0700
Paul E Condon <pecondon@mesanetworks.net> wrote:
> On 2009-02-10_10:12:00, John Hasler wrote:
> > owens writes:
> > > For some Engineers (particularly Electrical) that need to know how the
> > > CPU functions, Assembler is essential.
> >
> > Programmers need to know how cpus work and so should learn an assembly
> > language first. MIXAL will do.
> > --
> > John Hasler
>
> One of the promises made by Ritchie, et. al. to management of Bell
> Labs was that it could be used to code hardware drivers and other
> difficult stuff, and that it would minimize the need for assembly
> language coding experts. At the time, AT&T was building, and renting
> private telephone exchanges which were computer driven. Each customer
> needed to have their own business rules coded into the exchange. The
> cost, and delays, were a big problem to the company. Especially
> because they were also attempting to design and build their own
> special computers for these exchanges.
>
> I think this has turned out to be largely true. Now, IMHO, the only
> people who _must_ learn about hardward op-codes of individual cpu
> designs, are the people who write the adaptations of compilers to
> enable targeting that cpu . Somebody will always have to know these
> op-code sets in intimate detail. But the number of people who can earn
> a living from such knowledge is becoming vanishingly small, when
> compared to the number of people doing software.
>
You don't need to know hardware op codes, but for doing efficient algorithms
you do need to know some hardware.
I don' t know about x86 but at the time they taught us mips assembly in uni and
the nice thing there is that the assembly is directly linked to the actual cpu
wiring. Saved my ass a few times. Still helps me understand all sorts of things
(instruction interleaving, branch prediction and such)
> Assembly language as a part of pedagogy is, to me, not very useful.
> I think C, in an early version, with fewer whistles and bells, can
> be used as an effective teaching device. It is very close to what
> the hardware is actually doing.
>
Reply to: