[Oberon] High-level language vs assembler

Chris Burrows chris at cfbsoftware.com
Wed Oct 22 02:18:33 CEST 2014

> -----Original Message-----
> From: eas lab [mailto:lab.eas at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 22 October 2014 10:14 AM
> To: paulreed at paddedcell.com; ETH Oberon and related systems
> Subject: Re: [Oberon] High-level language vs assembler
> But trying to force asm-concepts into an Oberon-like notation, eg.
>  SYSTEM.Memory(SetSpeedReg, 47)
> feels like useing prose to replace musical-notation, or maths-
> formulars.
> Yes, there's no need to keep the now inappropriate original notation
> of
> the 60s: "mov R8,47".      I suggest
>   #47 -> R8
> conveys the concept, in a minimalist/most-economic way.
> But this is all about cognitive science...I guess.

Whichever notation you prefer is inconsequential. The mental effort required
to reliably and efficiently manipulate register usage and memory locations
is a task much better performed by machines than humans. This is particlarly
so with RISC designs with 16 or more registers at your disposal. 

The SYSTEM-type facilities allow you to perform low-level ASM-like
operations on high-level structured data items without having to manually
juggle with registers and keep track of absolute addresses.


Chris Burrows
CFB Software

More information about the Oberon mailing list