1 Jan
2009
1 Jan
'09
12:38 p.m.
Jules Richardson wrote:
Chuck Guzis wrote:
IBM mainframe architecture resembles this remark. Evidenced by the
instructions for unpacking packed-decimal numbers, stripping off leading
zeros, putting a dollar-sign in front of the whole thing, and storing
the result. All in a single instruction.
Peace... Sridhar
On 31 Dec 2008 at 18:52, Tony Duell wrote:
That possibly depends on the definition of assembly. To me it's
something along the lines of "the lowest-level instructions that can be
fed to the CPU" (even if those instructions might be quite involved and
do multiple things), so it's hard to imagine a CPU that didn't
essentially support assembly. Hnag on a second. Last week yopu were all telling
me that I could
program just about any modern microcontroller using whatever classic
computer I liked. Now you're telling me I have to use C (and
presumably have some machine that can host the C compiler). Which is
it? :-)
Are there any uCs made that don't have an assembly language?