随着汇编变得越来越不常见，出现了一个恶性循环:随着高级语言的成熟，汇编语言指令集的构建越来越少地是为了方便程序员，而更多地是为了方便编译器。

So now, realistically, it may be very hard to make the right decisions on, say, which registers you should use or which instructions are slightly more efficient. Compilers can use heuristics to figure out which tradeoffs are likely to have the best payoff. We can probably think through smaller problems and find local optimizations that might beat our now pretty sophisticated compilers, but odds are that in the average case, a good compiler will do a better job on the first try than a good programmer probably will. Eventually, like John Henry, we might beat the machine, but we might seriously burn ourselves out getting there.

Our problems are also now quite different. In 1986 I was trying to figure out how to get a little more speed out of small programs that involved putting a few hundred pixels on the screen; I wanted the animation to be less jerky. A fair case for assembly language. Now I'm trying to figure out how to represent abstractions around contract language and servicer policy for mortgages, and I'd rather read something that looks close to the language that the business folks speak. Unlike LISP macros, Assembly macros don't enforce much in the way of rules, so even though you might be able to get something reasonably close to a DSL in a good assembler, it'll be prone to all sorts of quirks that won't cause me problems if I wrote the same code in Ruby, Boo, Lisp, C# or even F#.

如果您的问题很容易用高效的汇编语言来表达，那么您的能力就更强了。

作为一名大部分时间都在嵌入式编程领域工作的开发人员，我认为汇编语言还远远没有成为一种死亡/过时的语言。有某种接近金属级别的编码(例如，在驱动程序中)有时不能用高级语言准确或有效地表达。我们几乎所有的硬件接口例程都是用汇编程序编写的。

That being said, this assembly code is wrapped such that it can be called from C code and is treated like a library. We don't write the entire program in assembly for many reasons. First and foremost is portability; our code base is used on several products that use different architectures and we want to maximize the amount of code that can be shared between them. Second is developer familiarity. Simply put, schools don't teach assembly like they used to, and our developers are far more productive in C than in assembly. Also, we have a wide variety of "extras" (things like libraries, debuggers, static analysis tools, etc) available for our C code that aren't available for assembly language code. Even if we wanted to write a pure-assembly program, we would not be able to because several critical hardware libraries are only available as C libs. In one sense, it's a chicken/egg problem. People are driven away from assembly because there aren't as many libraries and development/debug tools available for it, but the libs/tools don't exist because not enough people use assembly to warrant the effort creating them.

最后，任何语言都有适用的时间和地点。人们使用他们最熟悉和最有成效的东西。在程序员的程序库中可能总会有汇编的位置，但是大多数程序员会发现他们可以用一种高级语言编写代码，这种语言在更少的时间内几乎同样高效。

我猜即使是x86(_64)上的ASM也有意义，因为您可以利用编译器难以优化的指令来获得很多好处。以X264为例，它使用了大量的asm编码，速度增益是巨大的。

浏览这些答案，我敢打赌9/10的回复者从未使用过组装。

这是一个经常出现的老问题，你得到的答案都是一样的，而且大多是错误的答案。如果不是为了便携性，我仍然会自己组装所有的东西。即便如此，我还是用C编写代码，就像用汇编一样。

我“过去”写了很多汇编程序，我可以向你保证，当我用高级语言写程序时，我的效率要高得多。

我喜欢用汇编语言编程，但是用高级语言做同样的事情需要更多的代码，而且代码行和错误之间有直接的联系。(这在几十年前的《人月神话》中就有解释。)

可以把C语言看作是“高级汇编”，但再往上走几步，你就进入了另一个世界。在c#中，你不需要三思就可以写这样的代码:

foreach (string s in listOfStrings) { /* do stuff */ }

这将是几十行，甚至几百行的汇编代码，每个实现它的程序员将采用不同的方法，下一个来的人将不得不找出它。因此，如果您相信(许多人都相信)程序主要是为其他人阅读而编写的，那么汇编的可读性就不如典型的HLL。

编辑:我积累了一个用于常见任务的个人代码库，以及用于实现类c控制结构的宏。但在90年代，当gui成为常态时，我遇到了瓶颈。太多的时间被花在了例行公事上。

我的上一个需要使用ASM的任务是在几年前，编写代码来对抗恶意软件。没有用户界面，所以只有有趣的部分，没有臃肿的部分。