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!

早期的发现之一(你可以在布鲁克斯的《神秘的人月》中找到，这是20世纪60年代的经验)是，人们使用一种语言的效率或多或少与使用另一种语言的效率一样高，每天调试的代码行数也差不多。显然，这并不是普遍的事实，如果做得太过分，可能会崩溃，但对于Brooks时代的高级语言来说，这是普遍的事实。

因此，提高工作效率的最快方法是使用一行代码就能做更多工作的语言，这确实有效，至少对于像FORTRAN和COBOL这样复杂的语言，或者给出一个更现代的例子C。

我只能回答为什么我个人不经常用汇编编写程序，主要原因是这样做比较乏味。此外，我认为在没有立即注意到的情况下，更容易把事情搞砸。例如，你可能在一个例程中改变了使用寄存器的方式，但在另一个地方却忘记了这一点。它会很好地组装起来，直到很久以后你才会注意到。

也就是说，我确实认为组装仍然有有效的用途。例如，我有许多非常优化的汇编例程来处理大量数据，使用SIMD并遵循偏执的“每一个比特都是神圣的”[引用V.Stob]方法。(但请注意，简单的程序集实现通常比编译器为您生成的要糟糕得多。)

你好，我是一个编译器。

I just scanned thousands of lines of code while you were reading this sentence. I browsed through millions of possibilities of optimizing a single line of yours using hundreds of different optimization techniques based on a vast amount of academic research that you would spend years getting at. I won't feel any embarrassment, not even a slight ick, when I convert a three-line loop to thousands of instructions just to make it faster. I have no shame to go to great lengths of optimization or to do the dirtiest tricks. And if you don't want me to, maybe for a day or two, I'll behave and do it the way you like. I can transform the methods I'm using whenever you want, without even changing a single line of your code. I can even show you how your code would look in assembly, on different processor architectures and different operating systems and in different assembly conventions if you'd like. Yes, all in seconds. Because, you know, I can; and you know, you can't.

附言:哦，顺便说一下，你没有使用你写的一半代码。我帮了你一个忙，把它扔了。

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。

$$$

一家公司雇佣一名开发人员来帮助将代码转化为$$$。越快地生成有用的代码，公司就能越快地将代码转化为利润。

高级语言通常更擅长生成大量有用的代码。这并不是说集会没有它的位置，因为在有些时候和地方，没有别的方法可以。