dsimcha wrote:
I think you overestimate the amount of programmers that can read assembler
nowadays.
The thing is, you *don't* need to be able to read assembler in order to make
sense of the assembler output! For example, if:
f();
is in the source code, you don't need to know much assembler to see if it's
generating one instruction or a hundred.
FWIW I only learned when I posted a bunch of stuff here about various
performance issues and you kept asking me to read the disassembly. In hindsight
it was well worth it, though. I think reading assembly language and
understanding
the gist of how things work at that level is still an important skill for modern
programmers. While writing assembly is notoriously hard (I've never even tried
for anything non-trivial), reading it is a heck of a lot easier to pick up. I
went from zero to basically literate in a few evenings.
Right, assembler isn't hard to read after you spend a few moments with it. After
all,
MOV EAX,3
is hardly rocket science!
