> Because... adding levels below C and conventional assembler still leaves C exactly as many levels below "high level" language as it was before and if there's

> Because... adding levels below C and conventional assembler still leaves C exactly as many levels below "high level" language as it was before and if there's a "true low level language" for today I'd like to hear about it. Me too, actually. I know you meant that rhetorically, but what if you designed an instruction set that better matched modern processor designs and then built a low-level compiled language on top of it? My hunch is that modern processor designs are so complicated that you’d have to do similar amounts of abstraction to make the language usable, but I’m not sure.