If you wrote that code on Wiki from scratch without ever assembling it,
that's pretty amazing. My method is to basically copy, modify, and let
the computer find my problems - with lots of iterations. It's just a
different way to work I guess.
On 9/6/2023 12:29 AM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
Thanks a lot,
it would be always better to give even a very small ASSEMBLER program a
test run
instead of simply posting it to a public web site.
I will fix this on Wikipedia as soon as I can.
I'm not sure if ASSEMBLER should be used by humans :-) given this episode.
In fact, it was used in the past (heavily), because in the 1950s and
1960s, it was the only language we had.
And it is still used on Mainframes (some say: Mainframe Assembler is the
only usable Assembler, all others are not)
and as long as we have large code bases in Assembler, there is no other
way than supporting it
(and we have large code bases, this is what John Ehrman once told me ...
most customers who still have that
don't want to talk about it).
Anyway: the reasons to learn it (like: to understand the code produced
by other language translators better etc.
and to understand language translators, BTW) are very valid, and that's
what Ray Mullins (liebe Grüße)
tells in his papers, too, if I understand him right.
Another fun story:
Once a co-worker of mine (at the large insurance company mentioned
earlier) had a problem with IBM software,
and while communicating with IBM, he posted a bit of ASSEMBLER code
showing the error, and the answer of
IBM support was "Customer should not use ASSEMBLER" :-)
Kind regards
Bernd
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
