From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 09:13:56 +0800 From: "Rogelio Serrano" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] speaking of kenc In-Reply-To: <775b8d190705042214u63884855t8ffd2fc84853aa84@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <7560b2245493f07219455a36984c983f@coraid.com> <1178244537.16650.1835.camel@work.sfbay.sun.com> <20070503191149.G22416@orthanc.ca> <1178245220.16650.1845.camel@work.sfbay.sun.com> <20070503192201.A22416@orthanc.ca> <1178341898.8179.25.camel@work.sfbay.sun.com> <775b8d190705042214u63884855t8ffd2fc84853aa84@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5aef77b8-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 5/5/07, Bruce Ellis wrote: > i meant it. > > asm is gone, or should have been many years ago. > > explain a simple case when you need it. > seriously? compiling c code. can you imagine a c compiler that does not translate to asm first? or can you imagine porting a c compiler when you dont have an assembler? do you want to be hand coding machine code in a compiler's code generator? i think assembler is a good compromise. its good for compiler writers. or would you rather have the processor and hardware designers build in the language support in the hardware? how would you react if the hardware designers choice of language is different from yours?