0

This is why I use Assembly for all my programming needs

I suspect you are writing rather small systems programs, things most end-users will not see.

If one writes 'real' applications and not toys is sure that it is the other way round. I am wondering, what kind of applications we are talking about.
...
speak for your self! I write mainly 32-bit applications for windows and I am VERY productive.

I can write a complete working non-trivial MS-Windows application in about 5 minutes with Visual Studio 2005 (actually, the IDE will generate it). How many days/weeks/years does it take you to write the same application in pure assembly?

0

I suspect you are writing rather small systems programs, things most end-users will not see.

no comment

I can write a complete working non-trivial MS-Windows application in about 5 minutes with Visual Studio 2005 (actually, the IDE will generate it). How many days/weeks/years does it take you to write the same application in pure assembly?

WinAsm Studio IDE (and other IDE's I know of) can do it in less than a minute. I can upload any windows application of this kind here and tell you how to do it within this time interval.

Yes, some years ago there was a lack of development tools under Windows for Assembly but not anymore. Don't confuse the language with the tools.

Antonis

0

I suspect you are writing rather small systems programs, things most end-users will not see.

I can write a complete working non-trivial MS-Windows application in about 5 minutes with Visual Studio 2005 (actually, the IDE will generate it). How many days/weeks/years does it take you to write the same application in pure assembly?

Exactly

If I click some button in your application and it does XYZ, whether it does it in 0.01 seconds or 0.0001 makes little difference to Johnny end-user. It all seems instant. This is not where the bottlenecks are.

So I could spend a fraction of the time writing an application in something like VB.net or whatever, it may run slower and be less efficient with the processor BUT in the grand scheme of things it has negligible impact on worker/user efficiency.

From a company's point of view the answer is to write programs that are easily maintainable, flexible, portable and quite efficient and rather than making the program ultra efficient which costs developer time they'll throw extra hardware at it because its generally cheaper with more predictable results.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, people would be mad to write a large, complex application in assembly language.

Steve Gibson uses it as someone mentioned. For those who don't know he writes small utilities that highlight potential vulnerabilities in things or diagnostic utilities. His applications may be complex but they are not large and generally his applications do one thing and do it well.

0

So I could spend a fraction of the time writing an application in something like VB.net or whatever, it may run slower and be less efficient with the processor BUT in the grand scheme of things it has negligible impact on worker/user efficiency.

Huge, slow applications do have impact on my efficiency. I hate bulky applications.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, people would be mad to write a large, complex application in assembly language.

If one cannot write easily maintainable, flexible code it's not the language's problem.

You could be more productive by posting in some other HLL forums instead of spending your time here.

Regards,

Antonis

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.