| ??? 08/25/05 08:37 Read: times |
#100049 - Example Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I said:
Yes, it is true that a skilled and experienced assembler programmer may be able to write more compact code than a 'C' compiler - but merely using assembler in itself will not magically make your code shrink! A skilled and experienced assembler programmer will be able to write "tight" code because he (or she) understands the architecture, and how to use it to best advantage; he knows all the "tricks" to get the best out of it - tricks like using scaling instead of implementing a whole mass of floating-point code. The thing is, exactly the same experience will also enable you to write "tight" 'C' code! If you just jump in with no regard for the architecture, and no consideration for efficiency, you will end up with bloatware in 'C'! It's not the language ('C' or Assembler) that makes the big difference; it's how you use it! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Mathematics of Fractional # in Intel ass | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Search | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Actual task | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Lookup table? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Scale it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| echo........... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sounds like fun, but it will take you ma | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Using C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Space occupied | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That old chestnut! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Example | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Does it really matter, anyhow? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why assembler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If actual fraction numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| And decimal number, | 01/01/70 00:00 |