|ASSEMBLY vs C(++) email@example.com (W!cked) (1997-05-04)|
|Re: ASSEMBLY vs C(++) firstname.lastname@example.org (1997-05-08)|
|Re: ASSEMBLY vs C(++) David.Monniaux@ens-lyon.fr (1997-05-08)|
|Re: ASSEMBLY vs C(++) email@example.com (1997-05-08)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Alex Colvin)|
|Date:||8 May 1997 21:32:13 -0400|
|Organization:||Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA|
|Keywords:||C, assembler, performance|
"W!cked" <email@example.com> writes:
> [ relative merits of assembler vs. HLL ? ]
Many of us have written entire programs in assembly. Large ones too.
That's why we now use C when we can.
And yes, you could write Quake in assembler, and carefully tune it,
and it would probably run faster, and you might have it tuned for the
486 just about the time everyone started running on a 986.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.