Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Tue Apr 23 10:01:45 2002

see below, plz.

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner" <spc_at_conman.org>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)


> It was thus said that the Great Richard Erlacher once stated:
> >
> > so I meant that while you may have software that creates really pretty
decent
> > code for one platform, that same source code may not produce as good a
product
> > on another, and, in fact, may produce pretty bad code for yet another set
of
> > hardware. There's plenty of evidence of that, at least according to
people
> > with whom I routinely interact.
>
> Depends upon the compiler, and also what you are trying to do.
>
Yes, it does, which was my point. There are limits, though.
>
> > I personally code in assembler for the MCU's I use and occasionally use a
> > compiler if I have an environment where timing is not critical all the
time
> > and where it's easier to use logic spelled out in 'C' or Pascal. That
often
> > means that interrupt code is written in assembler while message generation
or
> > communication code is produced by a compiler. Portability is seldom an
issue
> > for me.
>
> For embeded systems I don't think portability is an issue really. And
> while I'm not sure if you work on embedded systems or not, if you are
> writing interrupt code, then yes, I can see why you would use assembler for
> that (heck, even the Linux kernel has the low level interrrupt routines in
> assembler). Me, I haven't had need to write an interrrupt handler in oh,
> maybe eight to ten years, but my code tends to be more of an application
> level that may or may not run on different computers.
>
I just finished an interrupt handler before breakfast, so I guess it hasn't
been as long for me. Of course, it's in 805x assembler ...
>
> -spc (Have code that's moved from SGIs to Suns to IBMs to HPs to PCs
> to Amigas to ... )
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 23 2002 - 10:01:45 BST