我现在正在comp组织学习汇编，虽然它很有趣，但它也非常低效。你必须在脑子里记住更多的细节才能让事情顺利进行，而且写同样的东西也会慢一些。例如，c++中一个简单的6行For循环可以等于18行或更多的汇编。

就我个人而言，学习硬件层面的工作方式非常有趣，它让我对计算的工作方式有了更多的了解。

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。

为什么?简单。

比较一下:

        for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++)
        {
            if (i % 3 == 0)
                Console.Write("Fizz");
            if (i % 5 == 0)
                Console.Write("Buzz");
            if (i % 3 != 0 && i % 5 != 0)
                Console.Write(i);
            Console.WriteLine();
        }

with

.locals init (
    [0] int32 i)
L_0000: ldc.i4.1 
L_0001: stloc.0 
L_0002: br.s L_003b
L_0004: ldloc.0 
L_0005: ldc.i4.3 
L_0006: rem 
L_0007: brtrue.s L_0013
L_0009: ldstr "Fizz"
L_000e: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::Write(string)
L_0013: ldloc.0 
L_0014: ldc.i4.5 
L_0015: rem 
L_0016: brtrue.s L_0022
L_0018: ldstr "Buzz"
L_001d: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::Write(string)
L_0022: ldloc.0 
L_0023: ldc.i4.3 
L_0024: rem 
L_0025: brfalse.s L_0032
L_0027: ldloc.0 
L_0028: ldc.i4.5 
L_0029: rem 
L_002a: brfalse.s L_0032
L_002c: ldloc.0 
L_002d: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::Write(int32)
L_0032: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine()
L_0037: ldloc.0 
L_0038: ldc.i4.1 
L_0039: add 
L_003a: stloc.0 
L_003b: ldloc.0 
L_003c: ldc.i4.s 100
L_003e: ble.s L_0004
L_0040: ret 

它们在功能上是相同的。 第二个甚至不是汇编程序，而是。net IL(中间语言，类似于Java的字节码)。第二次编译将IL转换为本地代码(即几乎是汇编程序)，使其更加神秘。

与高级语言相比，ASM的易读性很差，而且实际上难以维护。

此外，ASM开发人员比其他更流行的语言(如C)要少得多。

此外，如果您使用高级语言，并且有新的ASM指令可用(例如SSE)，您只需要更新您的编译器，您的旧代码就可以轻松使用新的指令。

如果下一个CPU有两倍多的寄存器呢?

这个问题的反义词是:编译器提供了什么功能?

我怀疑你能够/想要/应该比gcc -O3更好地优化你的ASM。

我用汇编编程已经有一个月了。我经常用C写一段代码，然后把它编译成汇编来帮助我。也许我没有充分利用C编译器的优化功能，但似乎我的C asm源包含不必要的操作。所以我开始看到，一个好的C编译器胜过一个好的汇编编码器的说法并不总是正确的。

Anyways, my assembly programs are so fast. And the more I use assembly the less time it takes me to write out my code because it's really not that hard. Also the comment about assembly having poor legibility is not true. If you label your programs correctly and make comments when there is additional elaboration needed you should be all set. In fact in ways assembly is more clear to the programmer because they are seeing what is happening at the level of the processor. I don't know about other programmers but for me I like knowing what's happening, rather than things being in a sort of black box.

With that said the real advantage of compilers is that a compiler can understand patterns and relationships and then automatically code them in the appropriate locations in the source. One popular example are virtual functions in C++ which requires the compiler to optimally map function pointers. However a compiler is limited to doing what the maker of the compiler allows the compiler to do. This leads to programmers sometimes having to resort to doing bizarre things with their code , adding coding time, when they could have been done trivially with assembly.

Personally I think the marketplace heavily supports high level languages. If assembly language was the only language in existence today then their would be about 70% less people programming and who knows where our world would be, probably back in the 90's. Higher level languages appeal to a broader range of people. This allows a higher supply of programmers to build the needed infrastructure of our world. Developing nations like China and India benefit heavily from languages like Java. These countries will fast develop their IT infrastructure and people will become more interconnected. So my point is that high level languages are popular not because they produce superior code but because they help to meet demand in the world's marketplaces.

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!