Java > Scala

[J Arrizza]

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Walter Bright
<newshound2 at digitalmars.com>wrote:

> On 12/19/2011 11:52 AM, ddverne wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 07:09:21 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> A programmer who doesn't know assembler is never going to write better
>>> than
>>> second rate programs.
>>>
>>

>  You are going to be a better C, C++, or D programmer if you're
> comfortable with assembler.
>

In my university the assembler course was a weeder course. If you passed it
you got in to second year (750 entrants, 150 openings).

My point is being comfortable with assembler is likely an effect not a
cause. If you have the motivation and skills to pick up assembler in a
semester then you are probably going to be a better programmer in the end
simply because of your motivation and skills, not necessarily from knowing
assembler.

OTOH my first exposure to programming was hand assembly of machine code on
a MIKBUG based SWTPC. When I used an actual assembler it was, "thank you
gxd for making my life a whole hell of a lot easier!" C was the next step
in ease. You mean I don't have to actually keep track of every register's
content? And so on up the tree of abstraction I went.

In the end, this progression has been extremely beneficial in visualizing
how all that abstract source code translates down into machine code. Memory
allocation, speed and size optimization, etc. etc. make a lot more sense
when you know how the machine behaves at a fundamental level.

And on the other-other hand, the bottom line is this. Wetware causes the
problems in sw development. How can a language feature help fix or prevent
those problems? And of course all that balanced against the need for some
developers to break the speed limit.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20111220/1c1adeb3/attachment.html>