To Mods:
I am seeing a lot of assembler programming questions/posts/problems.
It would be wonderful if you could start a forum specifically for assembler programming only.
Anyone else think this is a good idea?
I'm seeing a lot of C, C++, Basic questions. Are we going to have separate fora for each of these too? I voted "bad idea".
The AVR was designed for C, once you C it's just a really cool macro assembler the world will open up to you!
The main reason to have a ASM forum would be to avoid stupid comments from narrow minded C programmers like in #3
Moot? (Is AVR Freaks a "House of Cards"?)
P.S.
I voted "Good Idea".
Reasons :
AVR IAR Assembler Reference Guide
[page 21]
MIGRATING ASSEMBLER SOURCE CODE FROM THE ATMEL AVR ASSEMBLER TO THE AVR IAR ASSEMBLER
[page 96]
Call frame information directives
These directives allow backtrace information to be defined in the assembler source code.
via User Guides: IAR Embedded Workbench for AVR
ATtiny102 - 8-bit AVR Microcontrollers
ATTINY202 - 8-bit AVR Microcontrollers
to avoid stupid comments from narrow minded C programmers like in #3
I resemble that remark! 
I think I'll give it 5 stars!
Jim
I voted "Bad Idea."
Not so much because I have strong opinions on the subject; however, there are also mixed C/ASM questions, as well as inline assembler questions.
Where would those go?
I voted "Bad Idea".
Will it increase read/answer statistics ? Probably not!
Will it increase ASM vs C wars ? Probably !
I mostly ignore the actual sub-forum a post appears in. I find that layer of classification of no use at all.
I wonder how many freaks also think this way: Oooh - time for a Poll perhaps.
I mostly ignore the actual sub-forum a post appears in. I find that layer of classification of no use at all.
I wonder how many freaks also think this way: Oooh - time for a Poll perhaps.
Me too. I only check based on the hardware, since I know nothing about XMEGA and the 32-bit Atmel-specific parts.
What matters most of all is a GOOD TOPIC TITLE.
The main reason to have a ASM forum would be to avoid stupid comments from narrow minded C programmers like in #3
Wow, a tad harsh there.
I doubt it is mostly asm programming any more---i wonder what % has switched to C (or non-asm).
As far as asm, I still enjoy an occasional dose when I am in a hurry for things where C can be an arm-wrestling match or to reuse some old codes.
In some ways (for simple things) asm lets you mostly focus on the problem, no distractions about integer promotions, pointer dereferencing, getting your strings stored in flash vs ram, etc.
On the other hand when it gets more complex, you appreciate C or C++ doing a lot of the heavy lifting.
Propose you add a choice to the poll:
|
"Experience is what enables you to recognise a mistake the second time you make it." "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." "Wisdom is always wont to arrive late, and to be a little approximate on first possession." "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not unicorns." "Fast. Cheap. Good. Pick two." "We see a lot of arses on handlebars around here." - [J Ekdahl] |
 |
20 years too late?
ASM is far more FUN if fun is what you are looking for
I vote good idea. The title of the new section could be "Assemblers and Assembly/HLL interfacing".
I think the assembly/C wars are over, I haven't seen one in a long time.
It would be wonderful if you could start a forum specifically for assembler programming only.
Why start another forum here when you can do some google-ting and find many elsewhere? Or do you mean AVR assembly only? (I am guessing yes, AVR assembly only) In which case entering the following:
AVR assembly programming websites
Yields quite the list. Then there are the Google Groups out there as well.
Now, theres also the logistics of adding another forum. We have quite the laundry(dirty) list of things that need attention around here that are far more necessary than adding a forum specifically for ASM programming when 'Compilers and General Programming' covers that requirement quite nicely.
What matters most of all is a GOOD TOPIC TITLE.
BINGO!
"ASM: Indirect storage of PortB pin read to SRAM Question"
Pretty much gives the person scanning the lists a solid idea of what the topic is about. And if they can help great, if not they either move on, or read the thread to improve their knowledge.
"C: Indirect memory accessing via pointers"
Also lets the person Scanning the list know what the topic is about.
The answer is not to add another forum, and more complexity to teh mix. The answer is to make a proper introduction.
JMO YMMV
East Coast Jim
or perhaps even:
"C: mega328: Indirect memory accessing via pointers"
or perhaps even:
"C: mega328: Indirect memory accessing via pointers"
YEs! A very good example
East Coast Jim
In general, it is only time to create a new topic when there are so many questions along those lines in "less correct" topics that the people there are sick of it and DEMAND that "you assembly language folks should have your own topic so that you'll stop confusing the HLL programmers here in the xxxx topic!"
It hasn't reached that level yet.
It would probably help if people were very clear about whether they were asking about assembly because they really want to do assembly, or because they only THINK they need to do assembly.
Many of the assembly-language questions look like they're part of assignments from some sort of class. I wonder if we'd be better off having a "school" topic where people were honest about needing help/hints with homework, and get that sort of help without just getting answers...
Does anyone even look at what forum a topic is in?
My bookmarked page for 'freaks is the summary page so for me it is the topic title that is important.
Personally, I'd be happy if the 'new topics' indicators worked correctly...
Neil
I look at
so don't see a reason to add another forum. I am more likely to read an assembler topic but doing something with it... Meh.
The more sub fora you create the bigger the mess is going to be.
Newbees now a days already have trouble finding the right forum and thus post what ever forum they get to first.
what about the mixed c/ASM questions?
how about the AVR8 bit vs the 32bit versions.... not sure but Xmega and the 0/1 series have a different ASM language? (never used the last 3 for ASM so do not know) how about Keil vr IAR vs AS going to make different fora for that too?
Every now and tehn there is a small wave of ASM questions, probably as a number of schools start their practical lessons and a number students have not payed attention, or the teacher did not explain all the super detailed stuff due to lack of time.
The most important thing is that people should make the subject clear, then people can see in a single view what question is asked, but that seems to be a very hard thing to do.
Now I'm going to start a thread called "GOOD TOPIC TITLE" and see how many responses it gets before the moderators get exasperated...
S.
The scheme Dean invented for the Tutorial forum of using things like "[Asm]", "[C]", etc in thread titles works quite well but sadly it requires people to know to do it when they create threads - when a newbie comes here asking why they can't OUT to FOO (because Foo is out of the 0x00..0x5F range) then they aren't going to know to put [Asm] in the title. The new forum has "Tags" and I guess that's an attempt to do something similar but (a) who ever bothers to add the right Tags and (b) who ever reads them anyway - without looking who can tell me what the tags on #1 of this thread are?!?
I guess the moderators could helpfully edit an "[Asm]" into relevant post titles but quite often it's a [C/Asm] mix in fact!
We would need a pay rise for us to do thay at least an extra 0.
We would need a pay rise for us to do thay at least an extra 0.
At the very least.
jim
I think it's a good idea.
This way those with similar interests can visit those threads.
I thought it wouldn't be such a big deal, but I am not a zero paid mod either.
Are C vs ASM wars really a thing?
If so (those involved) need to tell yourself to get a life!
What we need, really, from the moderators aren't tags, or 'topic' edits, what we need is organization. So each post could be properly organized, we'll have categories, e.g.:
Org: Hardware
Org: C
Org: Asm
And then let people figure out which is more fun to write... S.
Are C vs ASM wars really a thing?
If so (those involved) need to tell yourself to get a life!
If so (those involved) need to tell yourself to get a life!
Quit fiddling with asm and c ...maybe less stress too.
it actually might not be too bad an idea! There's other possibilities:
I just signed up for the ‘super ju-jitsu and swedish body massage” courses. My days of laboring over assembler are done!
I'm gonna try writing for money, once I figure out who to write to. Never knew it would be so easy---I'm stoked!
I just signed up for the ‘super ju-jitsu and swedish body massage” courses. My days of laboring over assembler are done!
The hypnotism course might also come in handy some day.
I'm signing up for 'sins for money'. May as well make a profit out of a pastime :)
Neil
I'm signing up for 'sins for money'.
Maybe that describes your singing, or you had something else in mind? 
Repent now ($2.87)
Assembler programming is freak.
I like the idea.
Sorry, assembler doesn't seem to get much traction these days. Maybe try web assembler - that seems to get some people excited. It hardly moves my needle though. Care factor: low.
This is why I support the idea. I know this might be considered overwhelmingly freak and I do not expect something to be done.
Well, although AVR was designed to be programmed in C, assembly belongs to a microcontroller. C is just an abstraction.
I do not think it should be cut out just because C is much comfortable.
I don't know why people start a war over C vs. Assembly (not related to your comment). You can use both, C and assembly.
I think everyone should have atleast a basic (theoretical) understanding of assembly when working with microcontrollers and that is where an assembly subforum comes into play.
Edit: I think tiny's are frequently programmed in assembly. But maybe I am wrong here.
assembly belongs to a microcontroller.
Exactly. So assembly questions can go in the forum for the chip to which they belong.
If they're not specific to a particular chip, they can go in 'General Programming'.
No need to clutter the place up with any extra forums.
Too many people seem to have trouble choosing the right forum as it is - we don't need more to add to their confusion!
Seems to me that "forum" might be slightly more than questions; am I wrong?
I'm much more interested in finding/reading and sharing than asking.
I'm much more interested in finding/reading and sharing than asking.
I can't see how multiplying forums would help that at all? In fact, surely, it would make stuff harder to find - if it's spread over even more separate forums?
So what you really want is better classification - as in #24, #25, #29.
Are you volunteering to do that classification ... ?
If we made separate fora for each language where would this stop exactly? "Asm", "C", "C++", "Basic", "Pascal", "Ada", "Forth"... ?
One thing that proved to work in the Tutorial forum was simply to "tag" posts with something appropriate like "[C] how to handle volatility", "[Asm] Implementing a 16 bit MUL routine", etc etc.
Of course this forum does have:
(I stole that picture from post #1 in this very thread!) but hands up who actually ever starts a thread and sets appropriate tags anyway?? I also kind of wonder why #1 is tagged with things like "IAR", "EWAR", "tiny102" for a post/thread simply talking about Asm and Fora ?
One thing to realise is that if you do start branching into multiple forums (OK I said it!) then it makes the moderators job even more tedious because now every last question about Asm posted in the wrong place (most people don't think about where they post!) will have to be moved to the right location. The more froa/forums you create the worse this gets. (and then what do you do with the posts talking about the interleaved C generated by the C compiler - does that go into an Asm forum or a C one ??)
Edit: I think tiny's are frequently programmed in assembly. But maybe I am wrong here.
AN_42678 AT12489: Getting Started with ATtiny102 and ATtiny104 (page 10)
Conversely
Assembly Language Application on ATtiny104
If we made separate fora for each language where would this stop exactly? "Asm", "C", "C++", "Basic", "Pascal", "Ada", "Forth"... ?
and separate sub-fora for each variant/implementation of each language?
what do you do with the posts talking about the interleaved C generated by the C compiler - does that go into an Asm forum or a C one ??
Indeed.
And what about a post that shows code in ASM, but isn't actually about ASM specifically?
Or a post that starts in C, and the conclusion is that it should be in ASM - or vice-versa ?!
I agree that its unnecessary & unworkable.
This is why I support the idea.
Yet you posted 'Fast conversion of Integer to BCD; assembly atmega328p' in the Arduino forum - what does it have specifically to do with Arduino?
First, how I ended up here: 24LC256 --> AN1190 --> obviously I have to do it myself
Second, after it's done, is there a way to post it, so other can use it: yes I can post it on Arduino
Last, is there a way to separate all the "not needed stuff" that pops up every time you need something useful in assembly: no, it isn't; you'll have to start from the best book "ATmega328PDatasheet"
I'm happy with that.
Nobody is suposed to do something except to vote, here.
But why did you choose the 'Arduino' forum when it had nothing specifically to do with Arduino at all?
Surely, it would be far better in the 'megaAVR & tinyAVR' - to which it is directly relevant.
My point being to illustrate how multiplying forums is just going to make it even more confusing to choose the "right" forum for a post!
The hole "construction fase" of the project is based on an Arduino UNO v3 board. In the end I'll reuse the Arduino for something else.
It is about what I am doing with the help of an Arduino board. Is there something wrong?
