From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lm@bitmover.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 09:28:44 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] curmudgeon credit In-Reply-To: <201304280534.r3S5YrSu002857@skeeve.com> References: <20130427224146.GR664@bitmover.com> <201304280534.r3S5YrSu002857@skeeve.com> Message-ID: <20130428162844.GB1001@bitmover.com> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 08:34:53AM +0300, Aharon Robbins wrote: > > What I'd like is a new 64 bit PDP-11. That assembler was wonderful to > > read and write, only a short distance from C. > > True. > IF you are not writing the compiler or the low level OS routines, what > freaking difference does it make? We build source management systems and we still drop into assembler for some stuff. For example, we want to give ourselves a stack traceback when something dies. Another example is inner loops that are performance critical, we stare at the assembler. I don't expect the world to suddenly sit up and decide that it is important to do what I want and give me my 64 bit PDP-11, but if that happened I'd cheer :) I think part of it is a yearning for simpler times. That architecture was just so pleasant, you could move quite easily from C to assembler and back again. If I had to teach CS these days I'd prefer that assembler (but actually using it would be a disservice to the kids, you want them to know x86 or ARM at this point). -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitkeeper.com