31 Dec
2008
31 Dec
'08
8:02 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
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.
What the user gets to see is another matter; I expect lots of systems have
existed where the "bare metal" is essentially hidden from the user.
I've never looked into Sun's Java CPUs to see what they do, but I bet the
bytecode that they run is pretty low-level rather taking the higher-level
constructs familiar to most programming languages.
(Interesting question, though - I wonder what a CPU might look like where you
could just throw C source code at it, for instance :)
cheers
Jules
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?