Quote:Original post by taco13
Also, I understand it better than assembly.
No, I am not a psycho.
Why are you looking for resources then?
machine code
Why are you looking for resources then?
Quote:Original post by AntheusQuote:Original post by taco13
Also, I understand it better than assembly.
No, I am not a psycho.
Why are you looking for resources then?
Don't feed the troll.
Author
I am looking for resources because what I ment by resources was a list of the opcodes to refrence. I had searched intel before but couldn't find it so I didn't know where it was.
Taco13, sorry if I being rude, but I have serious doubts that you can read machine code better that assembly or high level languages. And as the guys have already said, programming in machine code is a total waste of time, no one does it anymore(at least on a big scale). If you really have an interest on low level programming, then you should use assembly because programming in machine code complicates (a lot!) what is already very complicated.
And please, dont tell us that you only use machine code because it's prettier, that's a really lousy explanation that only makes me doubt even more that you can really program more efficiently in it than in higher level languages.
And please, dont tell us that you only use machine code because it's prettier, that's a really lousy explanation that only makes me doubt even more that you can really program more efficiently in it than in higher level languages.
I remember one time I made a program in machine code that printed the numbers 1 to 10 to the screen, it was fun, but time consuming. And if you can read machine code with ease, doesn't that also mean you're familliar with all the instructions and thus assembly should be even easier? :confused:
When I was fiddling with machine code, I just used a disassembler and translated the assembly opcodes.
When I was fiddling with machine code, I just used a disassembler and translated the assembly opcodes.
Quote:Original post by jcabeleiraAnd please, dont tell us that you only use machine code because it's prettier, that's a really lousy explanation that only makes me doubt even more that you can really program more efficiently in it than in higher level languages.
Where did he say that? Not everyone has to worry about productivity or efficiency. There are other things, you know, challenge, fun, things like that... What's wrong with wasting some time doing something you enjoy?
JA
Quote:Original post by jantaQuote:Original post by jcabeleiraAnd please, dont tell us that you only use machine code because it's prettier, that's a really lousy explanation that only makes me doubt even more that you can really program more efficiently in it than in higher level languages.
Where did he say that? Not everyone has to worry about productivity or efficiency. There are other things, you know, challenge, fun, things like that... What's wrong with wasting some time doing something you enjoy?
JA
You're right, I'm sorry. I understand that sometimes the challenge is more important than making a useful program, what I don't understand is how can someone say that he can understand machine code better than higher level languages when he previously said that it's harder to read. So you have more troubles reading machine code than assembly but you find it easier to understand?
Quote:I think it's just more fun than the higher level languages. I also like the fact that it is harder to read.
Quote:Also, I understand it better than assembly. No, I am not a psycho.
Taco13, if you really want to use machine code then go ahead, who knows if you learn something useful from it, but I think you shouldn't waste too much time on it.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
