Hi Vasile,


--- Vasile Surducan <piclist9@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi John,
> 
> On 3/10/07, John Chung <kravnus@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Reasons why I choose assembly:
> >
> > 1) Depends on architecture. AVR with the bigger
> MCU
> > have an architecture tuned for high level language
> > like C. GCC support is VERY good for this MCU so I
> > choose C.
> > Microchip C compilers cost plenty and the
> compilers
> > aren't so great for PIC midrange due to it's
> limited
> > unsupportive arch. for HLL.
> >
> > 2) Assembly documentation is plenty for MCHIP.
> Plus
> > code samples in assembly. Here is basically the
> > support for the given language.
> 
> Exactly the same support is available in HLL

  I was refering to Microchip site. Support for HLL
does exist at the product site and sometimes the
Microchip site. So you are right here.

 
> >
> > 3) USE less memory. Regardless of the language for
> HLL
> > it use plenty of memory of the MCU. Assembly is
> > compact in size therefore and USE less memory and
> ADD
> > in more features.
> 
> Debatable. An asm beginner may use more memory than
> an beginner using
> a good compiler.
  
  I agree. 


> > 4) Speed... Depends on the req. of the
> application.
> 
> Very debatable. A HLL with all tricks already known
> will be faster than any asm
> 

  I agree. I have seen some VERY good programmers that
can squeeze out every clock cycles. This unfortunately
requires knowledge more than just assembly therefore
it really depends on the programmer. C can squeeze
more performance but with assembly we can squeeze
more. It is more of diminishing returns. How much time
and effort do we take to get what we want.

> >
> > 5) Debugging. One ought to know the target's
> assembly
> > for debugging the problem which includes the
> compiler
> > output and tracing the problem using some sort of
> > debugger. You write in Pascal but use gdb to debug
> the
> > problem. You know how it feels....
> 
> Here you have right if debugging is made using
> MPLAB. However there
> are built in simulators and external devices for
> debugging as well.
> Some of them like LED or serial console are well
> known.

  I agree.

> >
> > 6) Knowledge. I learn something new all the time.
> > Assembly is more expressive in it's language.
> Unlike
> > C++ and C I am able to do all the above and more
> due
> > to it's LAX rules.
> 
> Depends of your age and if you're programming for
> living or just for
> fun. I have doubts who is designing with PICs for
> living is so happy
> with asm every day...
> Just take a look to the old people reaction from
> this list.
> -- 
  This is something personal so I rather not go there
:) Personally it depends on what I need to do. On PC I
try to use C if possible. Okay I do use C++ due to the
amount of libraries written..... I try to keep a
balance between all the languages. Assembly if useful
for hardware manipulation. The instruction OUT for x86
is not naturally supported in C so I use macro or
functions that use embedded assembly. Intel C compiler
tends to use ALL those funny assembly stuff
internally. So I learn from there to embed assembly
into my C programs from time to time... For PIC I use
assembly which is for the MID range only. Once again
this is choice.

 John.


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love 
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist