5 ms·
Should be "get assembler". Assembly or assembling is the process of using an assembler to assemble assembler code, which is actually mnemonics.
by Annatar 10y ago
Should be "get assembler". Assembly or assembling is the process of using an assembler to assemble assembler code, which is actually mnemonics.
- vertex-four 10y agoIt's definitely also assembly, possibly even as the primary spelling - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_language
- Annatar 10y agoNo, that's just lame (and Wikipedia isn't always right). Ask any scene coder and they'll tell you they're coding in assembler, not "assembly".
- imron 10y agoWhy are scene coders more correct than other coders. If Agner Fog has no problem calling it 'assembly'[0], then neither do I. 0: http://agner.org/optimize/ http://agner.org/optimize/
- Annatar 10y agoWhy are scene coders more correct than other coders. Because they've written more applications in assembler than anyone else in the history of computing. Look at Aminet, and csdb.dk, and that's just Amiga and C=64, I haven't even included the Spectrum, Amstrad CPC, Atari ST and PC.
- phpnode 10y ago> Because they've written more applications in assembler than anyone else in the history of computing. Absolute unbridled nonsense.
- unwind 10y agoHave you considered asking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_(demoparty) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_(demoparty) to rename itself, then? They've been using that name since 1992, and if those guys aren't "scene coders" then I've never seen one. I never went back in the day, but pretty sure I didn't primarily interpret it as "ooh, a congregation of people".
- andars 10y agoIt shouldn't. 'Assembly' is the textual code, 'assembler' is the tool used to convert the text to machine code. I don't think the name is worth an argument, but your suggestion is no more correct than that is already in the title.
- Annatar 10y agoConsidering I spent my youth writing assembler code, I find it pretty upsetting someone from the internet lecturing me on what I was deeply involved with is called. I think I know what I was writing.
- Joeboy 10y agoI don't think anybody is claiming it's not called assembler, just that it's also / mostly called assembly. fwiw I wrote some [machine code via mnemonics] in the '80s (admittedly not lots) and assembly sounds more normal to me.
- andars 10y agoIt's a dangerous business, going onto the internet. You step into a site, and if you don't keep your feet, there is no knowing what you might hear.
- Stratoscope 10y agoAssembly language or assembly code is the most typical usage. There's nothing wrong with calling it assembler code either, but it's less common. Source: I started writing assembly code in 1968, over the years coding for Sigma 5/7, PDP-10, TI 9900, 6502, 8080, Z80, 8086, 68000, x86, and ARM. I occasionally saw it called assembler language, but less often than assembly language. Update: As I think about it, there is a bit more nuance to the terminology that I remembered at first. While I do recall "assembler language" and "assembler code" as being infrequently used, "assembler" by itself has often been a common usage: "I'm writing this in assembly code." "I'm writing this in assembler." Those were used fairly interchangeably, even by someone like me to whom "assembler code" sounded a bit off. So you're definitely not wrong to call it "assembler". Where you're going wrong is claiming that "assembly code" is incorrect.
- Annatar 10y agoPick up any book from the '80's on learning assembler and you'll be hard pressed to find "assembly" anywhere, especially for MOS 6502, Z80 or MC68000.
- Stratoscope 10y agoMy goodness, if you really insist on arguing this point, here are a few books for you. 6502: https://www.amazon.com/Assembly-Language-Programming-Lance-Leventhal/dp/007881216X https://www.amazon.com/Assembly-Language-Programming-Lance-L... ftp://ftp.apple.asimov.net/pub/apple_II/documentation/programming/6502assembly/6502%20Assembly%20Language%20Programming.pdf Z80: http://maben.homeip.net/static/S100/zilog/z80/Z80%20Assembly%20Language%20Programming%201979%20Leventhal.pdf http://maben.homeip.net/static/S100/zilog/z80/Z80%20Assembly... https://archive.org/details/Zilog_Z80_assembly_language_programming_classic https://archive.org/details/Zilog_Z80_assembly_language_prog... 68000: http://dev-docs.atariforge.org/files/Asm_Lang_Prog_68K_Family.pdf http://dev-docs.atariforge.org/files/Asm_Lang_Prog_68K_Famil... https://www.amazon.com/68000-Family-Assembly-Language-Programming/dp/0534932754 https://www.amazon.com/68000-Family-Assembly-Language-Progra...
- chrisseaton 10y ago
- flukus 10y ago> Assembly or assembling is the process of using an assembler to assemble assembler code Assembly is also the result of something that was assembled.
- AstralStorm 10y agoNo, those are called objects or object files. ;) (which is why the tool to handle them is called objdump)
- pwdisswordfish 10y agoTell that to your National Object File.
- flukus 10y agoI'm talking general English. What happens when you assembly a group of people? You have an assembly. The same can be said for other objects.
- flukus 10y agoThis should read: > What happens when you assemble a group of people? You have an assembly. The same can be said for other objects.
- bbcbasic 10y agoI like to call it machine code.
- Joeboy 10y agoTo me, machine code would mean the output of the assembler. Maybe the terminology isn't tied down that well though.
- kaoD 10y agoBut it isn't. Machine code is for computers, assembly for humans. Although assembly is machine code represented with mnemonics, they're not the same: assemblers take assembly and produce machine code.