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。

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!

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.

$$$

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。

C语言优于一个好的宏汇编器的地方是C语言类型检查。循环结构。自动栈管理。(几乎)自动变量管理。动态内存技术在汇编是一个巨大的痛苦在屁股。与C或更好的foo.insert()列表相比，正确地执行链表是非常可怕的。还有调试——嗯，谁更容易调试谁也不存在争议。他们在那儿轻而易举就赢了。

我几乎一半的职业生涯都是用汇编程序编写的，这让我很容易用汇编程序思考。它帮助我了解C编译器在做什么，这再次帮助我编写C编译器可以有效处理的代码。用C编写的一个经过深思熟虑的例程可以在汇编程序中输出你想要的东西——而且它是可移植的!由于跨平台的原因，我已经不得不将一些旧的asm例程重写回C，这并不有趣。

不，我将坚持使用C，并处理与使用HLL获得的生产时间相比偶尔出现的轻微性能放缓。

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。