4 ms·

Ask HN: Why was assembly language used in early 80s instead of cross compilers?

5 points by amichail 4y ago

While using a C compiler was not realistic on a C64, why wasn't a C cross compiler on a more powerful machine used instead of assembly language?

PaulHoule 4y ago
Some people used minicomputers to develop microcomputer software, for instance Infocom developed games like Zork on a DECSYSTEM-20 https://www.filfre.net/2013/03/the-top-of-its-game/ https://www.filfre.net/2013/03/the-top-of-its-game/ When I was in high school I developed a program for a teacher who had a CP/M machine based on a Z-80 on a much more powerful 80286-based PC using an emulator.
- mikerg87 4y ago
  Atari wrote most of its aracade video games by cross assembling on DEC PDP-11/20’s. Later they used better and bigger Vax systems but almost nothing was native in those days
dave4420 4y ago
1. Compilers weren’t as good at optimising back then. 2. If I’d saved up to buy a C64… exactly how was I supposed to get access to a more powerful machine, and why would I use it as a build farm instead of as my main home computer? 3. Graphics and sound were very not portable between different makes of home computer, so you’d have to rewrite your game if you wanted it to run on other makes anyway?
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  remember, at USD ~350k, minicomputers cost as much as houses.
fargle 4y ago
I think you are conflating assembly language vs. C and cross vs. native development. All four combinations were possible and all were used in the early 1980s too. Cross-assemblers, native assembler, cross compiler, native compiler. Not everything was a C64 either, but in that example and other early home computers, game, graphics, music tasks required hand written assembly to squeeze out every last ounce of performance and code size. Whether that was cross or self-hosted probably varies. The choice of cross or self-hosted development probably depends much more on the availability (or non-availability) of a self-hosted toolchain (assembler or compiler), and the availability or not of a host machine than the performance.

5 points by amichail 4y ago

While using a C compiler was not realistic on a C64, why wasn't a C cross compiler on a more powerful machine used instead of assembly language?

PaulHoule 4y ago

Some people used minicomputers to develop microcomputer software, for instance Infocom developed games like Zork on a DECSYSTEM-20 https://www.filfre.net/2013/03/the-top-of-its-game/ https://www.filfre.net/2013/03/the-top-of-its-game/ When I was in high school I developed a program for a teacher who had a CP/M machine based on a Z-80 on a much more powerful 80286-based PC using an emulator.

mikerg87 4y ago
Atari wrote most of its aracade video games by cross assembling on DEC PDP-11/20’s. Later they used better and bigger Vax systems but almost nothing was native in those days

dave4420 4y ago

1. Compilers weren’t as good at optimising back then. 2. If I’d saved up to buy a C64… exactly how was I supposed to get access to a more powerful machine, and why would I use it as a build farm instead of as my main home computer? 3. Graphics and sound were very not portable between different makes of home computer, so you’d have to rewrite your game if you wanted it to run on other makes anyway?

082349872349872 4y ago
remember, at USD ~350k, minicomputers cost as much as houses.

fargle 4y ago

I think you are conflating assembly language vs. C and cross vs. native development. All four combinations were possible and all were used in the early 1980s too. Cross-assemblers, native assembler, cross compiler, native compiler. Not everything was a C64 either, but in that example and other early home computers, game, graphics, music tasks required hand written assembly to squeeze out every last ounce of performance and code size. Whether that was cross or self-hosted probably varies. The choice of cross or self-hosted development probably depends much more on the availability (or non-availability) of a self-hosted toolchain (assembler or compiler), and the availability or not of a host machine than the performance.