IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Theory and Practice of Programming Forum / This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler."
Post #171,140
by static
Picture of static
8/26/04 9:11:16 PM
Reply
New This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler."
Although I enjoyed using C to poke around inside MS-DOS and Windows, nowadays I prefer more modern languages. With things like Big Integers. :-)

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
 
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.
Post #171,206
by jb4
Picture of jb4
8/27/04 9:35:47 AM
Reply
New Re: This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler.
C is basically the lingua franca for embedded these days (although C++ is starting to make inroads there, much to Todd's chagrin ;-) )
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
     What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (jb4) - (52) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:07:59 PM EDT
         What is typeof(0x80000000)? - (ChrisR) - (7) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:25:16 PM EDT
             right, add an L -NT - (deSitter) - (6) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:30:08 PM EDT
                 Ain't that a UL - (ChrisR) - (5) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:34:49 PM EDT
                     This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler." - (static) - (1) - Aug. 26, 2004, 09:11:16 PM EDT
                         Re: This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler. - (jb4) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:35:47 AM EDT
                     Actually, that would be a U (or u) - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:43:22 AM EDT
                         What about casting the values? - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:34:46 AM EDT
                             Yes, that was the solution I used - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:55:24 AM EDT
         Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (lordbeatnik) - (3) - Aug. 26, 2004, 11:05:40 PM EDT
             I guess... - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:39:19 AM EDT
                 If there was no ambiguity... - (lordbeatnik) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 06:51:20 PM EDT
                     For the next set of standards? - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:20 PM EDT
         Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (Arkadiy) - (36) - Aug. 27, 2004, 11:32:17 AM EDT
             Re: Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (jb4) - (35) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:15:45 PM EDT
                 Setting the high bit is processor dependent. - (hnick) - (34) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:27:28 PM EDT
                     OK, then the standard should be saying - (Arkadiy) - (33) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:53:36 PM EDT
                         No I actually write code based on them - (jb4) - (30) - Aug. 27, 2004, 02:27:25 PM EDT
                             Ignore them and use my common sence -NT - (Arkadiy) - (29) - Aug. 27, 2004, 03:24:32 PM EDT
                                 I'll bet debugging your code is a real joy... - (jb4) - (28) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:56 PM EDT
                                     Nope - (Arkadiy) - (27) - Aug. 31, 2004, 10:04:06 AM EDT
                                         And so tell me, O Oracle of Common Sence [sic] - (jb4) - (26) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:04:10 AM EDT
                                             offensive foul, ball to Ark - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:45 AM EDT
                                                 Rest assured, - (Arkadiy) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:17:52 AM EDT
                                                     :) ok -NT - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:55 AM EDT
                                                 OK, OK... - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:59 AM EDT
                                             Well, while the tone is disagreable, the question is - (Arkadiy) - (21) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:14:05 AM EDT
                                                 Point missed. - (jb4) - (20) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:35 AM EDT
                                                     If C were sane, TRUE = -1 and problem vanishes -NT - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:40 AM EDT
                                                         Ermm...say What? - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:28:42 AM EDT
                                                             Re: Ermm...say What? - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:37:26 AM EDT
                                                                 Much like Jewish law - (Arkadiy) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:43:34 AM EDT
                                                         So you prefer how VB does it?? -NT - (ben_tilly) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:01:31 PM EDT
                                                             Point: Ben... -NT - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:04:18 PM EDT
                                                             How it used to do it. - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:47:19 PM EDT
                                                                 Hehee! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 03:18:32 PM EDT
                                                     Why do you expect hex to be treated differently from decimal - (Arkadiy) - (11) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:32:44 AM EDT
                                                         Re: Why do you expect hex to be treated differently - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:42:16 AM EDT
                                                         Man, that's a good question! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 12:37:46 PM EDT
                                                         Now that's clarity! -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (8) - Aug. 31, 2004, 04:42:17 PM EDT
                                                             Nope, it's bad math - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:00:03 PM EDT
                                                                 But, counters of real things don't need negative values. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (6) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:19:13 PM EDT
                                                                     I'd like to add a negative number of votes for Bush. ;-) -NT - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:20:08 PM EDT
                                                                         That only works on Diebold machines. :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:23:34 PM EDT
                                                                     Certainly - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:21:51 PM EDT
                                                                         "Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (Arkadiy) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 06:59:29 PM EDT
                                                                             Re: "Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 07:03:32 PM EDT
                                                                                 Dunno. - (Arkadiy) - Sept. 1, 2004, 09:33:56 AM EDT
                         Wasn't trying to piss you off... - (hnick) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 04:06:40 PM EDT
                             Interesting assumption: - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:51:55 PM EDT
         Hmm...while the datatype will be first reached, - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 05:35:03 PM EDT
             True, but... - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:55:52 PM EDT
         Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (gdaustin) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:58 PM EDT

I like working for this guy.
He calls himself my towel boy.
He knows how to motivate me.
67 ms