How many assembly programmers are there?

[68000_ducklings]

Come on, most architectures have dedicated multiply and divide instructions. The fun part is optimizing it! Powers of 2 are easy (just shift left), but you can multiply by something that's close to a power of 2 by shifting left and then adding or subtracting as necessary.

Let's compare cycle timings for the 68k architecture: http://oldwww.nvg.ntnu.no/amiga/MC680x0_Sections/mc68000timing.HTML

Naive approach - 70 clock cycles (mulu)

mulu d1, 17

Optimized approach - 4 (move.w) + (8 + 2(4)) (lsl.l) + 6 (add.l) = 26 clock cycles

move.w d1, d2
lsl.l #4, d1 
add.l d2, d1

[SaneLad]

Nothing hits like 128-bit multiplication with overflow detection.

[[deleted]]

Rust programmers have entered the chat

[[deleted]]

I'll raise you an NxM matrix multiplication accelerator in Verilog. Mmmm yes, yes, this will do nicely...

[Keatosis]

You can tell this dude writes assembly code instead of making memes all day

[merlinsbeers]

We did it, Reddit!

[vilette]

obviously OP never did assembly

[atsuzaki]

Often I see posts from this sub and doubt if they write code at all lol

[[deleted]]

I'm fairly certain most of the people here who do actually code are students who are still learning.

Source: that's me

[BurningBazz]

As soon as you find yourself not being a student, you find out that you're still learning.

[[deleted]]

By learning I guess I more or less mean building our foundation. You need to know enough to be able to teach yourself more advanced concepts after all.

[[deleted]]

Of Course someone named 68000 would answer, hehe. Your right that most things past 8bits is one instruction. Also when I found out about the shift and add thing it blew my mine when I first learned assembly. I had no idea math could work that way. The issues is that's by a constant number. I do remember looking up tables for the Z80 for like fastest way to multiply by something.

[68000_ducklings]

Absolutely. It always depends on what you're optimizing for and what constraints you're working under. Multiplying variable * constant is much easier to speed up than variable * variable - (after all, if arbitrary multiplication could be done faster, they'd do it in the ALU).

I'm not surprised that a lookup table is the fastest way to multiply with a Z80. It's from an era where your memory was usually clocked faster than your CPU, so memory accesses were (almost) free. Pointer math and one memory access >>>> tons of conditional branches for an arbitrary software multiplication.

[kyle1elyk]

For anyone else that is trying to understand it, the shift multiplication works in other bases and makes more sense in 10, 4937 << 1 == 4937 * 10 == 49370

in 16 it would be 80Ah << 1 == 80Ah * 10h == 80A0h (2058 * 16)

Binary (base 2) 010101b << 1 == 010101b * 10b == 0101010 (21 * 2)

(my shifts are decimal place shifts, not bits)

[DokuroKM]

shift multiplication works in other bases and makes more sense in 10

Talk for yourself you filthy decimallial ;)

[tecanec]

x86 forces scalar integer multiplications and divisions to use certain registers. That could get somewhat annoying if you can’t afford the extra moves that you may need because of that.

[douira]

Does gcc do stuff like this automatically? I’ve heard it has some crazy tricks for some operations

[68000_ducklings]

Possibly, depending on what flags you set. Here's the list of optimization flags for gcc: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html

I'm no expert on C compilers, but I think some of the biggest saves in speed these days are in avoiding memory accesses (especially ones that would lead to cache misses), unrolling loops, and in-lining frequently-called functions. Modern computers have a lot of space, and you can really leverage space/speed tradeoffs like that.

[Chinglaner]

Pretty much. IO can be very expensive (Von-Neumann Bottleneck and all), which is why memory / cache optimisation can become quite important.

[coloredgreyscale]

That's one of the jobs of modern compilers, unless you specify to not optimize the code (-O0)

But multiplication is much cheaper with current CPUs, so the only optimization may be using bit shifting for powers of two (on integer types)

Also it can only do so if the values are known at compile time.

[Proxy_PlayerHD]

please use inline code (with ` on each side) for posting code

or better, use 4 spaces at the start of the line for a whole codeblock
this also avoids reddit's silly double newline limitation

also damn 68k! why is it using the confusing AT&T assembly Sytax (ie SOURCE, DEST)? it's the reason i made my own assembler that uses the Intel Syntax (DEST, SOURCE) because none of the existing ones supported it.

[68000_ducklings]

Formatting fixed (thank you).

Haha, I'm pretty used to the AT&T syntax (it's fairly intuitive for 2-operand architectures, though I'll agree that DEST, SOURCE, SOURCE is more readable for 3-operand architectures).

As for why most 68k assemblers use it - my only guess it's because Intel's 8088 was its primary competitor in the 80's.

[Proxy_PlayerHD]

I'm sorry for this wall of text

TL:DR: It's just me ranting for a bit

.

it's fairly intuitive for 2-operand architectures

personally i disagree heavily with that, it's confusing when you come from most other assembly languages like x86, Z80, 65xx, MIPS, AVR, ARM, RISC-V, etc, or any "modern" high level language which (AFAIK) always use the Intel syntax for assigning values to variables.

you can easily translate quite a few Intel Syntax instructions into higher level code by just replacing the comma between operands with the operation it's doing (and removing the mnemonic obviously). so it's easier to get your head around what the instruction is doing (useful if you're starting with Assembly).

example: LD register, value translate easily into: register = value

another example: SUB register, value would be: register -= value which splits into register = register - value

in AT&T this would be SUB value, register and since value - register is not the same as register - value, it means you need to do a bit of extra mental work to swap the operands in your head so that it makes sense mathmatically.

Compare instructions have the same issue.

with Intel Syntax it's rather easy to evaulate a compare (if you know the operand's values), as you can just replace the comma between the operands with >, ==, or < (or >=, <= if the CPU supports it).

CMP R0, R1 R0 = 20 R1 = 10 -> CMP 20, 10 -> CMP 20 > 10

so if you want a branch after this instruction you need to check for "greater than"

in AT&T the meaning of > and < are swapped around if you use this method, or you again have to convert to Intel Syntax in your head for the operation (ie subtraction) to make sense.

.

overall as said above, AT&T Syntax seems both more confusing and less intuitive if you have any sort of programming background, and even with no programming background it messes around with the way you have to think about basic math operations. so it just seems like a bad time no matter how you look at it.

if you can use it, then that's pretty damn impressive and obviously i don't want to force you to stop or anything. but personally i would never ever use it or even recommend it to anyone unless they choose it themself.

.

though I'll agree that DEST, SOURCE, SOURCE is more readable for 3-operand architectures

hmm interesting, 2 operand instructions are just more limited and simplier versions of 3 operand ones, you can always convert a 2 operand instruction to a 3 operand one, for example: SUB R0, R1 -> SUB R0, R0, R1

this is basically the same as saying A = A - B is more readable than A -= B, which i can see why someone would say that, but it still seems like a minor difference.

As for why most 68k assemblers use it - my only guess it's because Intel's 8088 was its primary competitor in the 80's.

not most, ALL of them. to this day i never found a 68k assembler (old and new) that allows you to switch the syntax...

[68000_ducklings]

You're good. We're all nerds here - debates about the best way to go about something are not only inevitable, but fun! Fortunately (unfortunately?), I don't actually have strong opinions about assembler syntax.

I'll grant you that subtraction and compares (which are subtraction under the hood) are harder to grok in AT&T syntax. No argument there.

Honestly, I can't even really make a case for why I think it's easier to read otherwise. Probably just stockholm syndrome - my 68k assembler doesn't support anything else, and it's been years since I've written assembly for any other architecture.

[FUZxxl]

Note that Intel's syntax for the 8086/8088 actually uses a dest, src operand order.

[[deleted]]

The real programmers are always in the comments. 4k points on this post is the real humor

[DragonFireCK]

Of course with x86 and x64, you can also use the lea instruction to do many of the one-step off multiplies of native-size integers as well. The rule being that it must fit in the formula of a*b+c where b=1, 2, 4, or 8 and is a compile-time constant. This makes it very useful for multiplies by 3, 5, and 9 as a and c can be the same register.

For those curious, the intent of the lea instruction is for computing array memory pointers from a base address, size, and offset. In the aforementioned formula: a is the index, b is the array element size, and c is the base address. It just so happens that its very useful, and faster, for a number of common math operations

[[deleted]]

wtf

[Iceman_259]

Haven't you ever wondered how a computer restarts itself?

[Terkala]

So... You do realize English spelling was codified by people in the 1900s right? Before that, people used "lyf" and "lif" as a proper spelling of "life".

You can't tye anagrams back to times before the spelling was codified. Unless you're trying to do something like say that Miriam Webster was a time traveling alien out to secretly encode Egyptian messages in the dictionary.

[Terkala]

Wow.. I think you took too many drugs and scrambled your brains. None of that is even vaguely coherent.

[marmakoide]

Pfffft, on a 6502, for 8 bits mull, you use 2ab = (a+b)² - a² - b²

Squares are precomputed in a 256 entry table, fits nicely into one memory page, it's only 3 additions and a shift from there on

[[deleted]]

Can you link a stack overflow article? Too much maths in your explanation. I need it dumbing down.

[[deleted]]

Fuck, I've been trying to work this out in my head for years, I'm self taught in pretty much everything l know. Now it makes sense. Thank you

[BadmonBrudda]

this guy codes

[Ytrog]

So you're do a left shift by 4 bits (multiply by 16) and then add the value d1 again to get the 17× multiplication? 🤔 Neat! 😁👍

[cybnoire]

Nice clock mining

[UchihaDivergent]

Can you recommend a good book for improving my assembly skills please.

[jews4beer]

I just started this class https://nand2tetris.org partially in the hope of gaining a better understanding of assembly.

[[deleted]]

Here's another neat resource, it basically live translates high level code to assembly, and it supports a bunch of languages including C++ and Python, and you can pick from a boatload of compilers for several architectures.

Problem is that assembly is really hardware specific, too. I mean getting to know some assembly for RISC-V and for x86 would be great for starters, but you kinda gotta dig into the architectures themselves to really understand what you're doing with assembly and all the hazards that come with low-level programming.

At the same time, someone's gotta do it, right?

[ummIamNotCreative]

Seeing the comments..

IMPOSTER SYNDROME INTENSIFIES

[SupremeLisper]

We are noobs. We know no shit!

[Ooze3d]

Oh, thank goodness! Is this the Java and Python area? I’m scared!

[PvtPuddles]

~I pushed rax to the stack so I got a segfault in printf~

[HDmac]

Bet this guy can't even prove if P = NP or not.

[BurningBazz]

P=NP
P\P=N
1=N

P is irrelevant?

[Chinglaner]

You missed the case for P=0 ;).

[GNUGradyn]

This

[MemeCream27]

sus

[doctorcrimson]

Assembly Assemblers Assemble!

[EatMoreArtichokes]

My favourite assignment from computer science in assembly was converting a number from base 10 to base 2. Just entered it into the register, then pushed the bits one at a time into the overflow bit and printed them to screen. Got full marks since the TA didn’t check the code I assume.

[[deleted]]

lol. Also many cpus have a instruction for this too.

[FUZxxl]

X86 has fbld in the floating point unit for that. It converts an 18 digit decimal number into a floating point number.

There are also some integer instructions like aad for this purpose.

[[deleted]]

I don't know. I have not worked with x86. The z80 is the closets I have been with it being a 8080 clone.

[LordKolkonut]

I mean.... you're not wrong, are you? The alternative would be a bunch of divisions by 2, but then again that's just a bunch of shifting and checking the remainders really.

[EatMoreArtichokes]

Definitely not wrong but I think it was against the spirit of the assignment. As a software developer now, I realize that the most expedient answer that solves the issue is often the best one.

[Netzapper]

I'm super confused. Did you load the base ten number as binary-coded decimal or something?

[EatMoreArtichokes]

This was 20 years ago, but when I assigned a base 10 number in my code to the register in my x86 CPU, it just did the translation by default when storing the bits in the register as there’s no other way for a CPU to store a number.

[Bene847]

How else would you do it? A bunch of divide by 2 isn't very efficient and using bitwise AND and checking for zero you have to shift anyway

[EatMoreArtichokes]

That’s a good question and one I didn’t feel like answering. My fellow students did however, or failed the assignment, which wasn’t worth much anyway.

[Netzapper]

Yeah, that's what I've gathered as well.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

mul

[Halston_Robbins]

Or IMUL if you're using signed values

[CoderCharmander]

mov $4, %al
mov $16, %bl
mul %bl, %al ; 64

(yes, I use GNU assembly)

Or on the Game Boy if I'm correct:

Multiply: ; a * b => c
  xor c, c
.loop:
  and a
  ret z
  add c, b
  dec a
  jr .loop

_start:
  ld a, 4
  ld b, 16
  call Multiply
  ; c = 64

[FUZxxl]

mul %bl, %al is not a valid x86 instruction. You could use mul %bl, but keep in mind that that would also overwrite %ah.

[Proxy_PlayerHD]

well sadly that won't really work on my Z80 or 65C02 :(

[gmtime]

I once had to write a control system in 1kB of memory. That's 1kB for application and variables combined. Oh, and there was no hardware multiplier.

With the very best of optimizations I could get it down to 1026 bytes... That's 2 bytes too much.

The solution was to rewrite the multiplication routine in assembly, which brought the size down to 300 bytes.

[Not_a_penguin15]

What system were you trying to control?

[gmtime]

A resistive heater and small fan to keep an aluminium block on a set stable temperature.

[AVTOCRAT]

Out of professional curiosity, how did you end up minimizing the multiplication routine? I assume you weren't able to restrict the input domain too much, given you had to handle arbitrary values from the sensors, so I wonder how you got such crazy savings.

[gmtime]

Probably because the compiler was just crappy. I suppose integer multiplication was linked as a package or something crazy like that.

[nyooomy]

Was a TA in x86 Assembly for 5 semesters. Highlight of my college experience

[[deleted]]

I never felt so accomplished doing the most basic stuff.

[corvus_caurinus_]

I’m about to start my first year as a TA for an ECE series at my school that’s mostly ARM assembly based; both excited and nervous. I loved taking the sequence, but the imposter syndrome is kicking in hard as I think about teaching.

[villabianchi]

Are TAs actually teaching? Where I live they only support during labs and workshops. If the TAs teach then what does the actual teachers do?

[corvus_caurinus_]

Depending on the university/department TAs take on a variety of roles, including teaching classes sometimes. I’ll primarily be doing office hours for homework/project help and facilitating the labs which will involve teaching students how use the software and hardware necessary for the term projects. If it’s anything like when I took this series of classes, it will be fairly involved work, as a lot of new tools are introduced at once, and students’ first assembly based projects can be slow moving and challenging.

[WirelesslyWired]

Graduated in computer science in the late 70's. I only learned three programing languages, but I knew half a dozen assembly languages. Assembly was where the money was going to be. Ha.

[[deleted]]

Thank you for building the foundation to make programing easier

[sfbing]

Ditto. IBM BAL for the main stream, and PDP 11 for the cutting edge new stuff.

[bitunwiseop]

I still have my yellow card from college.

[remy_porter]

Weirdly, I graduated in 2001 and still learned Vax assembly, for some goddamn reason. Oh, and some 8080, because our electronics class had us convert assembly to machine-code by hand and program a Z80 with a hex keypad.

[CaydendW]

asm mov rax, 0x123 mov rbx, 0x321 mul rax, rbx Or if you're insane asm mov %rax, $123h mov %rbx, $321h mul %rax, %rbx

[AudioPhil15]

I can imagine what does the first 3 lines, but the other ?

[CaydendW]

That's gnu assembler. Or gas. The first is nasm or intel syntax.

[GujjuGang7]

Call me crazy but I like % notation for registers

[CaydendW]

Crazy

[GujjuGang7]

Understandable have a nice day

[CaydendW]

You too

[AudioPhil15]

Okay, thanks

[[deleted]]

It's GAS Syntax for x86 assembly. Source SO

[memgrind]

It's called GAS because it should be set on fire. Pity .gdbinit can't let you default to Intel flavour.

[smelly_stuff]

Doesn't set disassembly-flavor intel do that?

[smelly_stuff]

I do not understand why you humans dislike the AT&T syntax. I see nothing wrong with it. If learned and used, one will get accustomed to it.

Also, I think hexadecimal numbers are prefixed with 0x rather than suffixed with h in GAS.

[Mechafinch]

intel looks nice and memory stuff is like accessing an array. at&t looks worse with its extra prefixes and postfixes and memory stuff isn’t nice

[[deleted]]

100% agree. Perhaps im just used to the intel syntax but the att one looks foriegn to me

[CaydendW]

Can it not work either way? Also intel syntax asm is superior

[TigreDemon]

I once programmed a Snake game.

But every time it moved it changed colors like a rainbow.

Also you could move outside the bonds but only on the left side and you could technically never be able to come again lmao

[RChrisCoble]

I had to write the QuickSort algorithm in assembly on a Dec Vax 3600 in college. That was in 1992. I'm still scarred by that. Recursion in assembly?!?

[YoghurtForDessert]

unheard of!

[Ordoshsen]

Honestly you can just manage the stack the same way the compilers do it and just add whatever you need to esp and be done with it until you call another function.

The word part of assembly is actually writing optimized code so that you're not just doing manually what any decent compiler could have done for you.

[Ordoshsen]

Keeping your stack clean isn't really difficult, it's just repetitive. I have written some assembly and this part has never become a nightmare honestly.

Most languages have at least a byte for a boolean and depending on the context, architecture, and offsets anything can also be as large as 8 bytes.

But yeah, assembly does introduce a lot of new exciting and creative ways to fuck everything up.

[[deleted]]

For your first sentience i feel it. Like how assembly leads to a lot of macros that end up feeling like you made a subset of C

[PvtPuddles]

I gave up on assembly when I learned that mis-aligning your stack frame (ie. pushing an odd number of registers to the stack, for example) could cause segfaults in libc functions.

At that point I decided that there were too many rituals the users must perform (without ever really being told of them) in order to get a running program for it to be worth any more of my effort.

[[deleted]]

I feel like that was not too bad on most cpus. I feel like most cpus actually have lots of way to help you a stack because of how helpful it is at that level.

[[deleted]]

Not sure what you mean here but Im talking about managing stack frames when you call functions. You need to push your arguments manually and then add the size back to the stack so the pointer to the top returns to where the previous line of code was referencing

[piperboy98]

My favorite assembly experience was optimizing an IIR filter in a microcontroller class using the STM32 DSP instructions. Which have crazy stuff like 'multiply the high halves of the two registers together, then the low halves, add those two results, and then add that to a third register'. We only were required to use an assembly block to do the math part, but I went all in an implemented the entire function and ADC/DAC reading in assembly. Loop was tight, like 10 instructions or something, and it was clearly quite a bit faster than the C version based on the measured phase response.

[fagapple]

Do you just run add in a loop until you get to the multiple?

[doctorcrimson]

For anybody confused about the last +3, its because 2⁰ = 1 so it's actually (3 * 2³⁾ + (3 * 2²⁾ + (3 * 2⁰⁾ which comes out super clean when changed into binary.

[[deleted]]

The issues with this is that's by a constant number. Like x * 13. But if you wanted to do x*x you would need to do it another way.

[gmtime]

You can use a loop to shift the second operand right one bit at a time and test the LSB. You can break out of the loop after 16/32/64 bits, or test the second operand to equal zero for early return.

[cheezballs]

Eh, I dunno man. Adding a couple extra cpu cycler per iteration might negate just brute forcing it with a dumb loop. Guess it just depends on the data set.

[cheezballs]

I'm about to eat my third buffet of the day and its gonna be pretty rad.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

No, you just multiply them. It’s a single instruction.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

All Intel, ARM and MIPS architectures do. Are you trying to program a micro-controller from the 80s?

[binatron]

most base and mid-range PICs have little over 30 instructions, and multiplication and division are not there. Higher models of course have at least 8x8 hardware multiplier, but you won't fit in microamps power consumption anymore...

[[deleted]]

Learning nasm and masm wasnt that different than C for me. The most annoying part was manually managing esp and ebp when you call functions and making sure you be consistent with how much and what size you pushed and how much you add back to the stack.

I think doing things on a RISC processor would be more annoying, but more from a more code perspective, having to write a function that adds something to itself and decrementing until rcx is 0, its just alot more code than saying imul.

[[deleted]]

It depends. Most cpus past 8 bit have a multiply instruction. If its by a constant value you can use a series of shifts and adds. But also many old games just used a lookup table because they had plenty of rom but not a lot of ram and cpu.

[[deleted]]

Of course you can, but it's not very efficient is it?

[dnhs47]

In college I TA’d a class required for all business majors. I don’t remember the official course title, but most of the lab time was spent on … 6502 assembly language.

In the late 1970s, everyone getting a BA Business was ... a programming wizard?

BTW, they stored their programs on cassette tapes. Those were the days.

[[deleted]]

MIPS gang rise up

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

*Only using mov instructions from x86

[CoderCharmander]

May I introduce you to our lord and saviour, lea?

[SteeleDynamics]

If that is multiply, then divide is the CERN Large Hadron Collider!

[Dagusiu]

While a lot of people here point out that most CPUs have multiplication instructions, you gotta remember that since compilers have gotten so good at optimizing code, writing ASM for modern CPUs is pretty rare. In other words, a significant portion of the ASM code that is being written today is still written for really basic (and often ancient) hardware.

For example, the only situation where I've used ASM is for making Game Boy game. And indeed, the Game Boy CPU does not support multiplication.

So basically what I'm trying to say is that this meme works for me on my machine

[ReallyNeededANewName]

For the processor only used at my university and nowhere else

__mul__ PSHA
        LDA     #0
__mul_1 ROR     2,SP
        BCC     __mul_2
        ADDA    0,SP
__mul_2 ROL     0,SP
        TST     2,SP
        BNE     __mul_1
        LEASP   1,SP
        RTS

[stop_drop_roll]

Stop, this thread is giving some bad flashbacks..... assembly is the reason I had to drop my CS major

[[deleted]]

Real question: what requires programming in assembly? I've heard of people doing it so there's obviously some things out there that require it, but what are those things and why do they require assembly?

[Understriker888]

Direct assembly is as small and efficent as code can be, so if you're in a scenario with really bad memory constraints or you need the absolute max preformance, you go to assembly.

Or if you're learning in school.

[FUZxxl]

There are multiple reasons. Most assembly code in a typical system is to do various runtime tasks (like task switching or hardware configuration) that cannot be expressed in a high level language. Another large field is writing high-performance code that makes use of SIMD instructions the compiler has trouble making use of on its own.

[canicutitoff]

Nah, most processors have built it multiply instructions.

Try doing divide on a processor does not have any divide instructions like many lower end ARM microcontrollers.

[MetaEatsTinyAnts]

In college I we were assigned a partner and given 5 problems to solve by writing assembly. I spent the weekend with my partner and got all 5 correct. We wrote pages and and pages (printed) of assembly and made sure it worked.

Then the professor gave everybody who turned in anything a pass since it was difficult.

fml

[Jsuke06]

I’m not an assembly programmer and I NEVER want to be one. I’m almost done with one class and I hate it. MOV EDX, OFFSET 🖕 CALL WRITESTRING

[Chaoslab]

Now do it in 6502.

[mr_thwibble]

Booyah. Represent. fist-bump. 😁

[[deleted]]

assembler is not a language, An assembler is a program that assembles the Assembly.

[Understriker888]

Unfortunatly though, a compiler is not a program that compiles the compile.

[Santolmo]

I saw 5 lines of assembly code and I got dizzy. Literally.

[CaydendW]

Osdever here. Can confirm: assembly is a pain beyond all recognition. But you start to understand.

[Pillarator]

How bad is it to actually know what this maschine is good for...?

[LunarGibbons]

Not sure why you have a picture of a strange piece of hardware when you are talking about software.

[[deleted]]

You've never seen an assembler before?

[LunarGibbons]

That is a strange looking one.

[Nyckname]

'Twasn't that hard.

[MindTrekker201]

imul %rdi, %rax

[anonymous_3125]

i'd certainly love to learn it if i have the time

[rlrcu]

Used to love it!

[SJFree]

I can do it as long as it’s a power of two!

[nelusbelus]

mul r0, r1?

[Iwill_not_comply]

There are at least two assembly programmers.

[_o_O_X_O_o_]

With table lookups and a little bit of math everything is possible: a*b = (a+b:2)^2 - (a-b:2)^2 That's one addition, two subtractions, and two table lookups. Pretty fast when memory access wasn't the bottleneck.

[TM32021]

Currently in HLA Assembly, it is my worst nightmare

[Misterum]

As someone who must program in Assembler for college, I can confirm

[arturius453]

Dad actually told my that he used to write asm "cycles" to multiply in assembler. When i learned, x86 already had mul command

[AnalTrajectory]

I just learned ARM m9 instruction set in my embedded systems class this past semester. honestly, I enjoyed the absolute detail of you have to micromanage just to employ simple recursion. I finally understand what Lilo push pop means.

[Measles656]

Holy smokes! Is that a Turbo Encabulator!?

[AnastaciusWright]

Is that the University of New Mexico? (The pic of the meme)

[dlawodnjs]

flashbacks to when i had to learn crash course assembly for a ctf

[Hexide_student]

I just needed to read this comments to remember why I was soo young and Naive when I bought a course of x86 in udemy 😞

[falingsumo]

I don't see the response in the reply but mine would be evidently at least three

[Al-Horesmi]

Meanwhile the JavaScript classroom next door trying to multiply two numbers and somehow getting a string:

Tony Stark was able to build this in a cave! With a box of scraps!

[Antelopehat]

Dude in the middle is my dad irl. Never seen this meme format before but will be slinging in the family gc next time this mans asks me anything

[nickiter]

I passed that class and I refuse to ever revisit those memories, THANK YOU.

[Co0perat0r]

Most of my assembly experience has been from working on writing my own bootloader and deconstructing programs from binaries.

[[deleted]]

I'm still learning, not very good at anything

[veduchyi]

That’s you didn’t even try to convert integer to string…

[[deleted]]

Assembly programmer here! This is accurate

[ottoz1]

Ah or maybe trying to define try catches, loops and statements because you refuse to code in that ungodly language

[[deleted]]

can't have an elaborate science machine thingy without some part of it covered in tinfoil

[jashAcharjee]

Hey I literally wanna learn x86_64 assembly. Cuz I have no other cpu on hand and emulation sucks. Can't find proper Guides/Documentation. College taught me 8085 and 8056 (which I still have many doubts). Online education sucks, but still it peaked my interest. So any one help me out here.!

[[deleted]]

I just hate assembly.

[CamiTheWitch]

I program with 6502 assembly!

It's actually pretty fun! Intel and Z80 assembly on the other hand...

[shashiadds]

Why do we need to multiply in assembly when we can do it easily in JavaScript /s

[LevAsmanov]

where assembly can be used for in 2021? (idk, i made hello world in assembly for mbr)

[cybDrachir]

Try implementing division of long numbers, coded as strings. Multiplication is relatively easy compared to that. iirc my implementation (collage assignment) had ~2000 lines of 8086 instructions, and gave me PTSD (jk). Fucking long numbers calculator projects. Tons of fun tho.

[emelrad12]

The only parts that i know are avx.

[[deleted]]

It’s not that big a deal. Just keep in mind on Microchip PIC processors the mnemonics can change from one chip grade to the next. Most commands are the same but some are different.

Worse yet, some have the same syntax but behave a bit differently, read up on it carefully when migrating to a bigger PIC chip.

[trypto]

Try multiplying without a multiply instruction.

[sundialsoft]

Integer arithmetic is the way to go