Timeline for How does learning assembly aid in programming?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 8, 2017 at 6:44 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Spelling and grammar |
| May 8, 2017 at 2:13 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 8, 2017 at 6:44 | |||||
| Jul 15, 2012 at 2:47 | comment | added | Joe R. | My point is, it doesn't directly compile into x86 assembly language, if you're on an Intel or AMD-based computer. Internal byte code -> assembler is not 1:1 same. Do the test and compare them. (see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_assembly_language | |
| Jul 14, 2012 at 21:06 | comment | added | ctrl-alt-delor | @FrankComputer last time I looked gcc compiled C/C++/fortran/java/ada/etc to internal byte code, and internal byte code to assembler. It then dispatches this assembler code to an assembler to convert it to machine code. | |
| Jul 14, 2012 at 20:59 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by dbr | ||
| Jul 14, 2012 at 20:56 | comment | added | dbr | @FrankComputer correct, but the machine code bytes pretty much map 1:1 to assembly instructions, so you can easily translate between an code object and ASM (decompiling or assembling) | |
| Jul 14, 2012 at 3:40 | comment | added | Joe R. | I always thought higher-level languages compiled into object (machine code) or pseudo-code, and not into ASM. | |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | user7519 | Ever single thing you claim about Java is incorrect as well. Starting with String a = "X"; String b = "X"; if( a==b) return true; which does in fact == true because of something called String interning that the compiler does. All the other Java statements are wrong as well. Java doesn't have pointers, it has references which are not the same thing. And none of any of that has anything to do with assembler in any fashion. Java passes primitives by value as well as references by value. Java doesn't have pointers so it can't pass them by anything. Again all irrelevant to knowing ASM. | |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 18:27 | comment | added | user7519 | Your first paragraph is completely incorrect: languages aren't compiled into ASM, they are compiled into Machine Code. Interpreters don't compile into ASM either, they interpret the code or byte code and call functions or methods on precompiled machine code. | |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 18:25 | history | edited | user7519 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | bad etiquette to sign your posts they are already tagged |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 18:06 | history | answered | Alex Vaz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |