汇编编程比高级语言(如c)花费更长的时间,更难编程,这似乎是一种主流观点。因此,出于这些原因以及更好的可移植性,似乎建议或假设用高级语言编写更好。

最近我一直在用x86汇编语言写作,我开始意识到这些原因可能都不是真的,除了可移植性。也许这更多的是一个熟悉的问题,知道如何写好汇编。我还注意到在汇编中编程与在HLL中编程有很大的不同。也许一个好的、有经验的汇编程序员可以像一个有经验的C程序员用C写程序一样轻松、快速地编写程序。

也许是因为汇编编程与hll有很大的不同,因此需要不同的思维、方法和方式,这使得对不熟悉的人编写程序看起来非常尴尬,因此给汇编编程带来了不好的名声。

如果可移植性不是问题,那么C语言比NASM这样的优秀汇编器有什么优势呢?

编辑: 我只是想指出。当你用汇编语言写作时,你不必只写指令代码。您可以使用宏、过程和您自己的约定来进行各种抽象,使程序更模块化、更可维护、更易于阅读。这就是熟悉如何编写好的汇编的原因。


当前回答

当你用汇编语言写作时,你不必只写指令代码。您可以使用宏、过程和您自己的约定来进行各种抽象,使程序更模块化、更可维护、更易于阅读。

因此,您基本上是在说,通过熟练地使用复杂的汇编程序,您可以使ASM代码越来越接近C(或者您自己发明的另一种低级语言),直到最终您的工作效率与C程序员一样高。

这是否回答了你的问题?: -)

我并不是在无所事事地说:我已经使用这样的汇编器和系统进行了编程。更好的是,汇编程序可以以虚拟处理器为目标,并且一个单独的翻译程序可以为目标平台编译汇编程序的输出。与LLVM的IF很相似,但其早期形式比它早了大约10年。因此,有了可移植性,再加上为特定目标汇编器编写例程的能力,以提高效率。

Writing using that assembler was about as productive as C, and with by comparison with GCC-3 (which was around by the time I was involved) the assembler/translator produced code that was roughly as fast and usually smaller. Size was really important, and the company had few programmers and was willing to teach new hires a new language before they could do anything useful. And we had the back-up that people who didn't know the assembler (e.g. customers) could write C and compile it for the same virtual processor, using the same calling convention and so on, so that it interfaced neatly. So it felt like a marginal win.

这是在开发汇编程序技术、库等方面花费了许多人多年的工作。不可否认的是,其中大部分都是为了使其可移植,如果它只针对一种架构,那么所有唱歌所有跳舞的汇编器就会容易得多。

总而言之:你可能不喜欢C语言,但这并不意味着使用C语言的努力就比想出更好的东西的努力更大。

其他回答

Oh hai, I'm a dataflow system. This App I'm running, are full of varrrious components. It's a distributed app, and it resides in 3 computers, on a powerful x86 and two smaller ARMs. Most of the components are written in C++, but there is a critical one written in ASM for the x86. Also, most components have several variations: compiled for different processors, also some components have special GPU versions. Shame or not, I have a script component (a wrapper component calls a script), which prints report, but only once a year. It doesn't even hurt that it's just a script, a slow script.

作为一个智能数据流应用程序,我知道,我的架构只适合特定的任务,其中信号/数据通过图形流动,例如自动化,视频/图像处理,音频处理(所有合成器使用数据流),但幸运的是,这些应用领域是非常需要功率的,其中优化是必不可少的。

我很确定有一天会出现一些其他的架构,它们也是关于优化(以及其他让编程更容易等的东西),它们将能够覆盖更多或其他领域,而我,数据流不能。

因此,“C vs ASM”的话题并不是一个真正的困境。这就像是在争论数字合成器还是模拟合成器更好(就像我之前提到的,我一直在研究合成器)。我建议,做好听的音乐。或倾听。无论什么。C不是相对于ASM。无论如何,我从未见过一个C程序被ASM攻击,反之亦然。

对不起,我的英语不好,尽管我不是一个新技术,我不是广为人知,我是一个孩子。很有希望。来,看看我的资料!

合理水平的汇编能力是一项有用的技能,特别是当您从事任何类型的系统级或嵌入式编程时,这并不是因为您必须编写那么多汇编程序,而是因为有时了解盒子的实际功能非常重要。如果您对汇编程序的概念和问题没有低级的理解,这可能会非常困难。

然而,至于在汇编器中实际编写大量代码,有几个原因导致它做得不多。

There's simply no (almost) need. Except for something like the very early system initialization and perhaps a few assembler fragments hidden in C functions or macros, all very low-level code that might once have been written in assembler can be written in C or C++ with no difficulty. Code in higher-level languages (even C and C++) condenses functionality into far fewer lines, and there is considerable research showing that the number of bugs correlates with the number of lines of source code. Ie, the same problem, solved in assembler and C, will have more bugs in assembler simply because its longer. The same argument motivates the move to higher level languages such as Perl, Python, etc. Writing in assembler, you have to deal with every single aspect of the problem, from detailed memory layout, instruction selection, algorithm choices, stack management, etc. Higher level languages take all this away from you, which is why are so much denser in terms of LOC.

从本质上讲,以上所有内容都与汇编程序与C或其他语言中可用的抽象级别有关。汇编程序迫使您自己制作所有的抽象,并通过您自己的自律来维护它们,而任何中级语言,如C,特别是高级语言,都可以为您提供开箱即用的抽象,以及相对容易地创建新抽象的能力。

人们似乎忘记了还有另一个方向。

为什么你一开始要用汇编语言写东西?为什么不用一种真正低级的语言来编写程序呢?

而不是

mov eax, 0x123
add eax, 0x456
push eax
call printInt

你还是写吧

B823010000
0556040000
50 
FF15.....

这有很多好处,你知道你的程序的确切大小,你可以重用指令的值作为其他指令的输入,你甚至不需要汇编程序来编写它,你可以使用任何文本编辑器……

你仍然喜欢汇编程序的原因,是其他人喜欢C语言的原因。

除了其他人对可读性、可维护性、更短的代码从而更少的错误和更简单的回答之外,我还将添加一个额外的原因:

程序的速度。

Yes, in assembly you can hand tune your code to make use of every last cycle and make it as fast as is physically possible. However who has the time? If you write a not-completely-stupid C program, the compiler will do a really good job of optimizing for you. Probably making at least 95% of the optimizations you'd do by hand, without you having to worry about keeping track of any of it. There's definitely a 90/10 kind of rule here, where that last 5% of optimizations will end up taking up 95% of your time. So why bother?

汇编在不同的微处理器之间是不可移植的。