:: Re: [DNG] Why C/C++ ?
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: karl
Date:  
To: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Why C/C++ ?
Didier:
...
>     In pretty all architectures this addressing mode is possible for
> data. There was a great innovation in the Motorolla M6809, around 1980:
> it was also possible for branching, which made PIC and PIE
> straightforward. Still today, AFAIK, this isn't common and I wonder why.


The explanation I heard for high level language like constructs in
some processor instruction sets is that it helped people coding in
assembler. Now that compilers and interpreters have made assebler
uncommon for most programmers, thoose constructs isn't needed, since
the compiler handles that.

>     BTW, I don't understand "gobbeldygook". Sorry, not a native English
> speaker.


I think it means something muddy, uncomprenhensive, diffuse, vague or
something like that.

Regards,
/Karl Hammar