🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1370@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <1035@aber-cs.UUCP>, pcg@aber-cs.UUCP (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
>> In article <1989Jun26.195044.4197@cs.rochester.edu> crowl@cs.rochester.edu
>> (Lawrence Crowl) writes:
>> 
>> 	[1] You are not supposed to write assembler programs on a RISC
>> 	    machine. The compilers have sophisticated algorithms to generate
>> 	    "optimal" multiplication/division out of simpler instructions.
>
>I find this attitude arrogant.  Neither you nor anyone else knows what 
>complicated operations I want to do.  Why should you try to make it 
>difficult for me to use the power of the computer?

Ok, now we have a chance to start the HLL versus assembly wars again ;-)

Seriously, there are machines that were NEVER meant to be programmed in
assembly!  Try programming a VLIW machine in assembly.  Chances are that unless
your the guy that architected it, or wrote the compilers for it, you can't.
(I've worked on such a box, at best it certainly ain't easy ;-)

I don't find it an arrogant attitude so much as an assumption that in
the GENERAL case allows the computer architect to make the best trade-
offs he can to allow the machine go as fast as possible for the largest
number of users in the machine's targeted market place.  


Steve Wilson