erik malund wrote:
-------------------------------
This is a '51 forum and, while Abshieks comment may be correct on a PC, the comments are invalid for embedded.

a low level language is
1. Machine dependant

2. Needs architecture to be well understood,
"So does high level."
not really to that extant that a low level programmer has to"

3. (assembly) Has one to one mapping with the machine code generated

4. hard to write programs in.
"not necessarily, some routines are actually easier to write in assembler."

some, not all. its easy to wite programs over all. thats why people using 'c'.

5. generates efficient code in size and speed.
"nope, but allow a proficient programmer to generate efficient code in size and speed"

yes right, we are not disscussing about a application generation wizard.

------------------------------------------------------
1. Eglish formal Language like instructions.

2. Hardware indepandant
"nope, try to transfer a C program from a '51 to a PIC"

here a HLL is used to act as low level with some level ease. that abuse does not changes the global definition and properties languages.

3. architechture independant
"whatever that means, but see above"

that means the you can use basic programming construct like "IF THEN ELSE" WHILE,FOR without getting bothered about actual istructions provided for it.

4. easy to write programs in the sense that programmer has no need to waste his energy in above three points but just to keep his logic good
nope, see above

5. compiled machine code possibly has the one to many mapping.


abhishek