home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: user1.mnsinc.com!huang
- From: huang@mnsinc.com (Szu-Wen Huang)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,rec.games.programmer
- Subject: Re: ! Read me and State your opinion.
- Followup-To: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,rec.games.programmer
- Date: 10 Apr 1996 14:47:27 GMT
- Organization: Monumental Network Systems
- Message-ID: <4kghm0$250@news1.mnsinc.com>
- References: <4kegoq$f2d$1@mhadg.production.compuserve.com> <4kfle4$haf@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <316B9241.3F54@wight.hursley.ibm.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: user.mnsinc.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Max Waterman (dwater@wight.hursley.ibm.com) wrote:
- : TWalker952 wrote:
-
- : > Hate to burst your experience bubble... However, C, C++, PASCAL,BASIC and
- : > the like are all "high-level" languages... Assembly and machine code are
- : > "low-level"....
-
- : I have heard C called a low level language, though, so he is correct.
- : The people who call it a low-level language aren't (perhaps) correct. I
- : would like to venture to suggest that C is on the lower side of the
- : high-level languages. I think quite a few would agree.
-
- I've never heard C described as "low-level", but when its use began on
- small machines, I've heard the term "medium-level" associated with it.
- The rationale is that C is really a thinly-disguised abstraction of
- assembly language, because its constructs map readily to assembly. Of
- course, I've also heard assembly described as a "high-level" language -
- by people who type opcodes in hex directly into the box ;).
-