Looking for experienced C/C++ / ASM programmer

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by a.owens@novartisoft.com, Oct 31, 2011.

  1. Guest

    For more information please contact a.owens {} novartisoft dt com,
    minimum 5 years experience candidates only please, work at home
    project based work, well paid
    thank you
     
    , Oct 31, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. jgharston Guest

    Which assembler?

    JGH
     
    jgharston, Oct 31, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. BGB Guest

    On 10/31/2011 7:05 AM, jgharston wrote:
    > Which assembler?
    >


    and what sort of job?...


    my case:
    I know x86 and x86-64 ASM, and am sort-of familiar with ARM.
    my personal preference is Intel-style syntax (such as NASM), but am not
    so fond of GAS syntax.

    (I have my own assembler as well, which uses an NASM-like syntax, and
    supports x86 and x86-64, and partly supports ARM).

    I have been writing code in C for about 15 years or so.
    some experience with C++, but it isn't my main-use language.

    major areas of familiarity:
    compiler and VM technology (wrote a C compiler for a VM, created a
    custom script language, experience with writing interpreters and JIT
    compilers);
    3D engines and tools (wrote 3D modeling and skeletal animation tools,
    wrote an FPS / First-Person-Shooter style 3D engine, ...);
    in the past (late 90s/early 2000s), I once wrote a basic OS (for x86,
    mostly using the PE/COFF format for binaries, was on early stages of GUI
    development when I dropped the project due to lack of foreseeable
    relevance);
    ....

    actually, said 3D engine and VM projects contain many of remnants of
    code from the OS project (some parts, such as the VFS /
    Virtual-File-System subsystem, retain the concept of FS drivers,
    although some years back the VFS was partly rewritten/simplified, ...).

    or such...
     
    BGB, Oct 31, 2011
    #3
  4. jgharston Guest

    BGB wrote:
    > jgharston wrote:
    > > Which assembler?

    > and what sort of job?...


    Too often HR droids think "assembler" means x86 without realising
    there's dozens of specific assembler.

    I've programmed in 6502, Z80, 6809, 32016, ARM, PDP-11 as well
    as x86, but I doubt they'd realise they were also all "assembler"
    even if you dropped it on them from as great height.

    JGH
     
    jgharston, Oct 31, 2011
    #4
  5. BartC Guest

    "jgharston" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > BGB wrote:
    >> jgharston wrote:
    >> > Which assembler?

    >> and what sort of job?...

    >
    > Too often HR droids think "assembler" means x86 without realising
    > there's dozens of specific assembler.
    >
    > I've programmed in 6502, Z80, 6809, 32016, ARM, PDP-11 as well
    > as x86, but I doubt they'd realise they were also all "assembler"
    > even if you dropped it on them from as great height.


    What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?

    --
    Bartc
     
    BartC, Oct 31, 2011
    #5
  6. James Kuyper Guest

    On 10/31/2011 12:39 PM, BartC wrote:
    >
    >
    > "jgharston" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> BGB wrote:
    >>> jgharston wrote:
    >>>> Which assembler?
    >>> and what sort of job?...

    >>
    >> Too often HR droids think "assembler" means x86 without realising
    >> there's dozens of specific assembler.
    >>
    >> I've programmed in 6502, Z80, 6809, 32016, ARM, PDP-11 as well
    >> as x86, but I doubt they'd realise they were also all "assembler"
    >> even if you dropped it on them from as great height.

    >
    > What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?


    Since they just specified "assembler", without indicating which kind of
    assembler experience they're looking for, it seem pretty reasonable to
    assume that they don't really know what they want.
     
    James Kuyper, Oct 31, 2011
    #6
  7. BartC wrote:

    > What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?


    I have PLAN experience, if that's any help!

    --
    When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
    this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
    Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting
     
    Frederick Williams, Oct 31, 2011
    #7
  8. "BartC" <> writes:

    > "jgharston" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> BGB wrote:
    >>> jgharston wrote:
    >>> > Which assembler?
    >>> and what sort of job?...

    >>
    >> Too often HR droids think "assembler" means x86 without realising
    >> there's dozens of specific assembler.
    >>
    >> I've programmed in 6502, Z80, 6809, 32016, ARM, PDP-11 as well
    >> as x86, but I doubt they'd realise they were also all "assembler"
    >> even if you dropped it on them from as great height.

    >
    > What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?


    A programmer who's experienced in sevearl different types of assembly is
    probably going to have an easier time learning the Next Big Thing than a
    programmer with only one assembly language.

    -- Patrick
     
    Patrick Scheible, Oct 31, 2011
    #8
  9. On Oct 31, 5:55 pm, Frederick Williams <>
    wrote:
    > BartC wrote:
    > > What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?

    >
    > I have PLAN experience, if that's any help!


    ICL 1900 series.

    How about Myriad User Code?
     
    Nick Keighley, Nov 1, 2011
    #9
  10. jacob navia Guest

    Le 01/11/11 14:29, Nick Keighley a écrit :
    > On Oct 31, 5:55 pm, Frederick Williams<>
    > wrote:
    >> BartC wrote:
    >>> What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80 programmers?

    >>
    >> I have PLAN experience, if that's any help!

    >
    > ICL 1900 series.
    >
    > How about Myriad User Code?


    One of the big problems of old people is that they tend to live
    in the past.

    ANY discussion in this group leads to

    "And in machine XXX (dead since at least 20 years) bytes were
    8.75 bits, remember that eh?"

    This has nothing with remembering history but everything
    with seeking to revive "old memories of yore".

    I have nothing against old people but as I age, I try to
    stay away from old age's pitfalls, in the same way as when I was young
    I tried to avoid young age's pitfalls.
     
    jacob navia, Nov 1, 2011
    #10
  11. BartC Guest

    "jacob navia" <> wrote in message
    news:j8ote4$ghj$...
    > Le 01/11/11 14:29, Nick Keighley a écrit :
    >> On Oct 31, 5:55 pm, Frederick Williams<>
    >> wrote:
    >>> BartC wrote:
    >>>> What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80
    >>>> programmers?
    >>>
    >>> I have PLAN experience, if that's any help!

    >>
    >> ICL 1900 series.
    >>
    >> How about Myriad User Code?

    >
    > One of the big problems of old people is that they tend to live
    > in the past.
    >
    > ANY discussion in this group leads to
    >
    > "And in machine XXX (dead since at least 20 years) bytes were
    > 8.75 bits, remember that eh?"


    We didn't even have bytes...

    --
    Bartc
     
    BartC, Nov 1, 2011
    #11
  12. Ian Collins Guest

    On 11/ 2/11 02:49 AM, jacob navia wrote:
    >
    > I have nothing against old people but as I age, I try to
    > stay away from old age's pitfalls, in the same way as when I was young
    > I tried to avoid young age's pitfalls.


    So you adopted middle-age pitfalls ant a young age and you've stuck with
    them?

    --
    Ian Collins
     
    Ian Collins, Nov 1, 2011
    #12
  13. BGB Guest

    On 11/1/2011 6:49 AM, jacob navia wrote:
    > Le 01/11/11 14:29, Nick Keighley a écrit :
    >> On Oct 31, 5:55 pm, Frederick Williams<>
    >> wrote:
    >>> BartC wrote:
    >>>> What do you think the chances are of them wanting pdp-11 or z80
    >>>> programmers?
    >>>
    >>> I have PLAN experience, if that's any help!

    >>
    >> ICL 1900 series.
    >>
    >> How about Myriad User Code?

    >
    > One of the big problems of old people is that they tend to live
    > in the past.
    >
    > ANY discussion in this group leads to
    >
    > "And in machine XXX (dead since at least 20 years) bytes were
    > 8.75 bits, remember that eh?"
    >
    > This has nothing with remembering history but everything
    > with seeking to revive "old memories of yore".
    >
    > I have nothing against old people but as I age, I try to
    > stay away from old age's pitfalls, in the same way as when I was young
    > I tried to avoid young age's pitfalls.
    >


    most of my life, x86 has been the dominant architecture.
    back when I was young (as in, early elementary-school years / early 90s,
    originally learning how to use computers) DOS was still a major OS,
    though at this point being displaced by Windows...

    I guess maybe in the early 90s x86 was battling off m68k or similar, but
    Macs were fairly rare IME (IIRC, most people just had PCs...).


    I was alive during part of the 80s, but FWIW I don't remember it.


    sadly, I am getting fairly old now as well...
     
    BGB, Nov 1, 2011
    #13
  14. Ark Guest

    On 10/31/2011 12:58 PM, James Kuyper wrote:
    > On 10/31/2011 12:39 PM, BartC wrote:


    > Since they just specified "assembler", without indicating which kind of
    > assembler experience they're looking for, it seem pretty reasonable to
    > assume that they don't really know what they want.


    OTOH, Any assembly programming takes understanding of "how machines
    work", willingness to read data sheets, etc. That's portable across
    architectures. Knowledge of instruction sets, register stalls etc. is
    easier acquired. People very seldom need a stellar assembler programmer
     
    Ark, Nov 4, 2011
    #14
  15. Joe keane Guest

    I learned 6502 when i was a kid (no we didn't have assembler, you just
    have to put the codes in a BASIC string), later PDP-11, and then any
    assembler language seems the same.

    I guees i'm an old fart?
     
    Joe keane, Nov 4, 2011
    #15
  16. gwowen Guest

    On Nov 1, 1:49 pm, jacob navia <> wrote:

    > ANY discussion in this group leads to
    >
    > "And in machine XXX (dead since at least 20 years) bytes were
    > 8.75 bits, remember that eh?"


    Who the hell writes x86 assembler professionally these days though?
    Video codec writers, perhaps. Everyone else, if they're forced into
    writing assembly, its almost always because the target processor is
    *not* a general purpose.

    Clue: The x86 and its descendants are not the most widely produced
    microprocessors in the world - and it isn't even close - even for
    things that are, loosely, general purpose computers. And, given that
    smartphones and tablets and the like appear to be future, that gap is
    going to widen, and not close.

    So, if you're going to talk chip-specific assembler, and you're not
    using an ARM instruction set, you're talking about a niche market.
     
    gwowen, Nov 4, 2011
    #16
  17. BGB Guest

    On 11/4/2011 7:07 AM, gwowen wrote:
    > On Nov 1, 1:49 pm, jacob navia<> wrote:
    >
    >> ANY discussion in this group leads to
    >>
    >> "And in machine XXX (dead since at least 20 years) bytes were
    >> 8.75 bits, remember that eh?"

    >
    > Who the hell writes x86 assembler professionally these days though?
    > Video codec writers, perhaps. Everyone else, if they're forced into
    > writing assembly, its almost always because the target processor is
    > *not* a general purpose.
    >


    lots of people write x86 assembler...

    at this point, it is probably because there are still things one may
    want to do in a program, which are not readily possible (or practical)
    purely within C or similar, so someone needs ASM to make it work correctly.

    performance is sometimes a motivation, probably more often it is to
    either use HW specific features, or to work around some natural limits
    in how C works and is implemented on processors.


    a simple example would be writing a general purpose "apply" function,
    where one calls a function pointer with an arbitrary (only known at
    runtime) argument list.

    in C, this essentially requires a (potentially massive) switch
    statement, which requires converting the argument list into a number,
    .... and generally ends up kind of slow, and adding a fair amount of size
    to the final binary.

    in ASM, the task is much more straightforward.
    hence, ASM ends up being preferable here.

    likewise, going the reverse, and for things like constructing lambdas
    (which look/behave like ordinary function pointers), ...

    maybe:
    try to write a pure C implementation of something like setjmp/longjmp;
    ....


    > Clue: The x86 and its descendants are not the most widely produced
    > microprocessors in the world - and it isn't even close - even for
    > things that are, loosely, general purpose computers. And, given that
    > smartphones and tablets and the like appear to be future, that gap is
    > going to widen, and not close.
    >


    people say that "smartphones/tablets/... as future", however this seems
    unlikely. far more likely, they will be used alongside desktops and
    laptops and like, and after a few years people will wonder why their
    sales drop so much: "oh yeah... market saturation...".

    for most small embedded devices, the number of units is misleading, as
    most are non-programmable, so maybe a few people produce the original
    software for a given device, but they run off millions of units. doesn't
    mean that this constitutes a larger amount of total work (by
    programmers), only that a large number of units have been produced.


    > So, if you're going to talk chip-specific assembler, and you're not
    > using an ARM instruction set, you're talking about a niche market.


    x86 is likely still most commonly used, even for assembler.
    ARM probably comes in second, and most of this is likely people writing
    software for Android or similar, and doing something which needs ASM.
     
    BGB, Nov 4, 2011
    #17
  18. gwowen Guest

    On Nov 4, 3:30 pm, BGB <> wrote:
    > > So, if you're going to talk chip-specific assembler, and you're not
    > > using an ARM instruction set, you're talking about a niche market.

    >
    > x86 is likely still most commonly used, even for assembler.


    By volume, ARM chips massively outsell x86 chips, and most of those
    are used on devices so diverse that each one will be require bespoke
    code - frequently in assembler (especially for the chips with little
    memory). The x86 chips will run Windows or some Unix-like OS, which
    means even the bespoke code will be compiled [C/C++/Fortran], byte-
    compiled [Java, C#] or interpreted (VB, Perl, Python). No-one writes
    CGI/SQL in assembly. Some numerical codes will have highly tuned core
    code in assembly (to exploit SIMD, etc) but even that is increasingly
    being devolved to massively parallel GPU-code [CUDA, etc].

    So tell me, how on earth do you reach the conclusion that "x86 is
    likely still most commonly used, even for assembler"?
     
    gwowen, Nov 4, 2011
    #18
  19. Kaz Kylheku Guest

    On 2011-11-04, BGB <> wrote:
    > lots of people write x86 assembler...


    Can you put that into some kind of numbers?
     
    Kaz Kylheku, Nov 4, 2011
    #19
  20. On Nov 4, 8:01 pm, Robert Wessel <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:30:03 -0700, BGB <> wrote:
    >
    > Smartphone shipments started exceeding PC shipments last year.  And
    > those are all programmable (and does not include feature phones or
    > tablets).
    >
    > For the vast majority of users, PC effectively aren't programmable
    > either - almost all software run on 95% of PCs is written by a "few"
    > people who then run off "millions" of units.
    >

    Currently I'm running a version of Windows. Open are two "folders", an
    Open Office document with my novel in it, a copy of wordpad showing
    some C source, a copy of a source editor called Crimson Editor, a
    command prompt window which I use for running tcc (tiny C compiler),
    Adobe Viewer with a scientific paper, and, of course, the web browser
    I'm typing this into.

    So most of these programs are mass market ones, and the ones that
    aren't are to do with programming.

    That's one reason we're seeing a shift from PCs to less flexible (in
    software terms) but more portable and easier to use devices. Most
    people want to run a fairly limited set of programs. The exception is
    games, but even here, games are moving to the internet.

    --
    Download free games:
    http://www.malcolmmclean.site11.com/www
     
    Malcolm McLean, Nov 4, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bill
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    2,570
    Dave Monroe
    Jul 23, 2004
  2. Digital Puer
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    356
    Dave Monroe
    Aug 4, 2004
  3. Dave
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    419
    Andrew Thompson
    Oct 25, 2004
  4. Guy Middleton

    looking for intro C text for experienced programmer

    Guy Middleton, Sep 1, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    374
    Guy Middleton
    Sep 1, 2003
  5. TMChris
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    242
    TMChris
    Oct 14, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page