On Tue Apr 28 2009 14:29:43 Sasha Pachev wrote: > The issue in the post and the question about & got me thinking. With > the arrival of more powerful hardware which made possible the > existence of Java-like languages where the internals of the CPU > architecture are deeply hidden, we've gained something but I think > we've lost something as well. It is good for the programmer to be > close to the hardware enough to feel some of the stress that his code > puts on it. C++ is a good language to learn even if you never program > in it for a job.
I totally agree with the reasoning, and feel that assembly should be a requirement simply for the understanding it provides. You think differently when programming in any language once you've learned assembly and consider what's happening underneath. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
