Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder7.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 20:29:20 -0500 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 02:28:30 +0100 From: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" Newsgroups: alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Subject: Re: Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems' References: <1q8s3dvb888t.dlg@v.nguard.lh> <1rqenk95m4on0.dlg@v.nguard.lh> <170720201231335465%nospam@nospam.invalid> Organization: 255 software MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M () Lines: 36 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-foB1UN0Sf7FLZDn64AkYnf9wXDXajtJ5rdN2CymCgcC8HnAQKqJioWewyvC5laOX0ykuQ/bTCflyDdq!ggZ2uoGDf0PYl/PmsqIYxPd7YuEGe1Bjn6yh5TUjkuAOHXvd+zBqIZXG33n97xtg/0zOs9Ag X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 3191 Xref: csiph.com alt.comp.os.windows-10:117774 comp.sys.intel:707 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips:2622 On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 02:18:15, Brian Gregory wrote: >On 17/07/2020 17:31, nospam wrote: >> In article , J. P. Gilliver (John) >> wrote: >> >>> I remember - I _think_ it was in the last decade, but it might have >>>been >>> more - being startled when I spoke to a young computing graduate, to >>> find he'd never done any assembler. At that time, after my initial >>> double-take, I thought to myself: the field is big enough, that there'll >>> be plenty of room for him, and in practice he'll probably never have any >>> trouble finding interesting and well-paid employment. >> there is no need for assembler anymore, except in very rare >> circumstances. >> > >On PCs maybe. > >I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still >done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level. > Yes. Define "need". Compact code is noticeably more efficient - so runs faster. Yes, for a lot of things, the returns don't justify the effort - for a lot of things that are only done once, or where speed doesn't matter, or - these days - to _some_ extent where modern processor power can hide the inefficiency of the code. I suspect IrfanView, for example, is mostly coded in either assembler, or at least quite low-level code (or just possibly using an excellent optimiser - which are rare with ultra-high-level languages, such as scripting interpreters). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf It's a beta orgy, not a product. - Mayayana in alt.windows7.general, 2018-3-8