flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > What's your favourite programming language and why?

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Artlav



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 188
Location: Moscow, Russia
Artlav
Pascal, Object pascal.
It's good for all the applications, especially when you got 6 years long library of implementations.
Flexible, easy to read (not only for the others, but for you).
Can be used for OS-level development as well as for large application.

Disadvantage:
General underestimation, and consequently, lack of a good compiler.
Best of them is FreePascal and Delphi. Turbo pascal is too limited and a bit old.
Post 15 May 2006, 12:53
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
yetifoot



Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 7
yetifoot
I just want to stick up a little for BASIC. I think when most people think of BASIC they think of the bad old days when it was very limited. IE too few data types, interpreted, no 'real' subs/functions, lack of advanced features.

This brings me to my favourite language FreeBASIC. To avoid spamming you with all the details, i'll just say it's a far more modern implementation of BASIC, and is the reason i have become interested in ASM again (it allows inline ASM).

Historically my favourite languages/implemetations have been

Atari ST
STOS
GFA-BASIC ( 3.5 ? ) / GFA Assembler

PC
Turbo Pascal 5.5
Borland C++ 3.1
MASM32 (Hutchs Distro)
Visual BASIC 6
Delphi 6
GNU C
FreeBASIC
FASM

I found it interesting that someone mentioned Oberon. I'm currently reading Wirths 'Compiler Construction' and its all about Oberon (not too suprising considing the author!)

PS thanks for the link, i waited 5 months for my library to get the Wirth book, and i now discover its available as a free PDF download!
Post 21 May 2006, 00:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
f0dder wrote:
it uses reverse polish notation?

I never learnt Forth, so I don't know if it's true, but some things to note:

Just because infix notation is "standard" doesn't mean it's the best or perfect. Sure, nor is RPN. But a thing to note is that "standard" things are usually the worst. Since there are so FEW other notations, and MOST people use infix, it should come as no surprise to see it as "the only (supreme) and best notation!!!". But, to be honest, from my point of view, humanity would have been benefiting much more if we used "better" things (and elegant like RPN) than our "standardism".

sorry for philosophy


EDIT: Now for the subject of this thread.. well asm and C. Don't get me wrong, I hate C++. OOP makes bloated designs. As I usually say it's not the compiler that makes good code, rather the design, and it's the fault of OOP that forces you to think in 'object' design, which is totally ridiculous to how instructions work. That's why it's generally bloated or inefficient design.

C is very much like asm, but higher-level. It's the same type of language (procedural??). What do I see "beautiful" in assembly? Well, the fact that it forces you to "usually" extend your humanity-capitalism-consumer crap (i.e "be a man of value. Not of success (like big companies, who don't care about anything at all if they have money)". And in asm I see the language of those folk who are not blinded by greed or advancements (doom?), those who appreciate every thing and do it either for fun or for intellectual challenge/pleasure, something like that. I.e not the consuming oriented guys that consume every resources (and I'm not reffering only to computers) who say: "Who cares about the resources?? I have money... muahaha!!".
Post 22 May 2006, 15:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Anyone ever try either of the following? They look interesting! Very Happy

Open Object REXX
UniCon
Post 23 May 2006, 22:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
WiESi



Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 14
Location: Austria
WiESi
Java
Likes:
- Syntax
- OOP
- Easy
- Fast development
Dislikes
- Interpreted language
- No direct hardware/system access
I don't have the feeling that Java is slow on my machine (P4, 2.8 GHz, 512 MB RAM).

C++
Likes:
- OOP
- Compiler produces fast code
- Inline assembler etc.
Dislikes:
- Syntax
- Multi-Inheritance

Assembler
Likes:
- The computer does what you tell him
- Extremely fast
- Very small programs
Dislikes:
- Time expensive development
- Spaghetti-Code (jmp, etc.)

In general I like OOP because most times it's easier than any other solution. However OOP slows down your application/game (but not in every case).

_________________
JavaAmp
Post 24 May 2006, 12:31
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
ant-str-84



Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 1
ant-str-84
C is the best language for low-level programming (especially, when you have excellent C compiler and collection of varius linkers).
Assembler is good to write VERY SMALL and MACHINE SPECIFIC parts of low-level code.
Post 05 Jun 2006, 02:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Adam Kachwalla



Joined: 01 Apr 2006
Posts: 150
Adam Kachwalla
I like assembler in the fact that debugging it then makes the code easier to modify if it generates a GPF, for example.

Also, the fact that an empty ASM program is 0 bytes, a program with one instruction is only 2 bytes (8 bytes max), etc. makes it so compact compared to other languages. For example, in VB6, an empty program is 16KB long!
Post 10 Jul 2007, 11:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Maverick



Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe
Maverick
Assembler is not a language, but a tool.

Assembly is the language.

Sometimes you may refer to "assembler language" for things like macro or other language extensions (e.g. ORG), etc.. but the damn thing's name is Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly.

Assembly is the most miscalled language in the universe.. sigh.

(I've been saying this for tens of years now but it keeps on being mispelled Smile )
Post 10 Jul 2007, 14:38
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
dakoder



Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 7
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
dakoder
Maverick wrote:
Assembler is not a language, but a tool.

Assembly is the language.

Sometimes you may refer to "assembler language" for things like macro or other language extensions (e.g. ORG), etc.. but the damn thing's name is Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly. Assembly.

Assembly is the most miscalled language in the universe.. sigh.

(I've been saying this for tens of years now but it keeps on being mispelled Smile )


Yes! Its like saying you program in compiler.
Post 01 Jul 2010, 19:38
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
Coty



Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 546
Location: ␀
Coty
Wow, old thread, and maybe in the wrong place? Anyway...

Assembly likes:
Simple clear syntax
easy to understand (for me anyway)
fast code
small code
direct hardware access
looks more clean and isn't all over the place.

Dislikes:
None, call me weird but I like everything about assembly.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BASIC likes:
quick coding with little thought
easy to learn
clear syntax

Dislikes:
large code
not very fast
No direct hardware access (at least none I have seen)


Last edited by Coty on 02 Jul 2010, 02:07; edited 1 time in total
Post 01 Jul 2010, 22:07
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Necromancer!
Post 01 Jul 2010, 22:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug


Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina
LocoDelAssembly
Quote:

and maybe in the wrong place?
Hehe, you're right! Is it possible that there were no moderators at that time? Razz

Moving from OS Construction (can you believe it?) to Heap.
Post 01 Jul 2010, 22:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
and assembly is scriptable, using C,C++ or any HLL.
Post 01 Jul 2010, 23:26
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
catafest



Joined: 05 Aug 2010
Posts: 120
catafest
Assembly , Python , Delphi and C++
Post 16 Jan 2011, 21:42
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E
YONG
FASM assembly, of course!

Reason: No need to write any comments!

Wink
Post 17 Jan 2011, 09:39
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
assembler
because it is the only real programming langage.

all other are just macros, that will always run as assembler, even virtual machines like java, are in assembler.
i dislike the logic of why do simple when it can be complicated, behind HLL.

and because asm programing is something like elitist, only people patient enough can code in asm, then, programs made in asm are always made by competent people, not the case of fast and easy to dev langages.

but it doesn't mean that asm programing give always good result or made by competent programmers, as a proof, my programs are always crappy, because i am not a real programmer, just an asm gamer who like to play with code instead of play with PS3 or else.

that's why a real asm programmer is the elite of programmation, because he codes something useable, efficient, LIGHT and fast.

as an example, the main program used here, fasmw, that is really a good program, clean, simple, easy to use, intuitive, etc...
Post 17 Jan 2011, 11:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Basic
A soft spot here, but would definitely not return to it.

C
I like it because it has a simple, straightforward syntax once you get used to it ^^.

C++
Dislike... some of the template metaprogramming can get a little confusing and the syntactical quirks are far more numerous than C. Each C++ has his own pet language feature, so collaboration ends in a mishmash of different C++ coding styles.

Java
Need to learn it, but from what I've seen it appears to be very C#-like

C#
Definitely a RAD language, and seems to have a lot of nice things about it.

Haskell
Been learning function programming with Haskell and absolutely love it. It is a bit of a mental leap, but I have learnt some Scheme before...
In my opinion, as a language, Haskell is the best out of this list. However, performance-wise, it does well, but definitely not as fast as optimised C or handwritten assembly.

Assembly
Like it, but usually have insufficient time to mess around with it these days. C compilers are good enough for most instances.

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 17 Jan 2011, 11:54
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Raedwulf wrote:
Java
Need to learn it, but from what I've seen it appears to be very C#-like
The other way around Smile - but they're similar, yes. Having worked a fair amount with both, I'd say C# hase the upper hand... C#1 felt a bit like a cheap knock-off of Java, C#2 is where it got interesting and stands on it's own, and with C#3 it's zoomed far past Java.

Why? You can make your own value types, and generics (C#2) are superior, being "real" generics (allowing you to work on value types without boxing) whereas Javas generics are just syntactic sugar (resulting in non-generic code + compiler-generated casts).

C#3: implicit typing (but still strong typing!) of local variables is great, anonymous types can be pretty nifty, lambda expressions can make your code short & sweet & easy to read, expression trees allow for some serious code kung-fu, and LINQ is just great for reducing the amount of trivial & repetitive code.

I really like C# for being a very pragmatic language. And when you need to interface with native code, P/Invoke is a lot easier to deal with than Java's JNI Smile

Raedwulf wrote:
C++
Dislike... some of the template metaprogramming can get a little confusing and the syntactical quirks are far more numerous than C. Each C++ has his own pet language feature, so collaboration ends in a mishmash of different C++ coding styles.
Depend on the people you're working with Smile. But it's a complex language that takes a lot of time to learn (and by learn, I mean using it correctly & efficiently, not just learning the language basics and then spewing out C-style code). Even with all it's problems, it's probably still my favorite language because of it's extreme flexibility and high performance.

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 17 Jan 2011, 13:57
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8885
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
f0dder, ur reply really motivate me to try c# again :p
Post 17 Jan 2011, 16:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
sleepsleep wrote:
f0dder, ur reply really motivate me to try c# again :p
I must admit I didn't expect it, but I've come to really like the language after actually using it for a while. My biggest gripe is with the .NET framework, there's some bugs here and there, and a bunch of quirks here and there... and then there's the "not so portable" issue (mono doesn't cover everything), as well as possible patent issues, and the conspiracy theories of what MS's "we won't sue" guarantees really cover... which is all a shame.

I've also been positively surprised by performance, even if .NET apps are a bit heavy on the memory consumption side (not as bad as a lot of people think, though, as they misread/misunderstand the memory stats).

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 17 Jan 2011, 17:47
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.