ked2000
|
  |
| Joined: 10 Jul 2011 |
| Total Posts: 1059 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 08:34 PM |
| I don't know, but I do want to learn a language that is almost compatible with everything. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
129K
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 19010 |
|
| |
|
xSIXx
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Aug 2010 |
| Total Posts: 9202 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
MettaurSp
|
  |
| Joined: 20 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 3179 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 08:40 PM |
| Definitely not TI-Basic o3o I say probably Asm due to it's nature as a low level language. Now if only I could get a hang of it.... lol |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 08:53 PM |
| C is probably the most portable language. Almost every device has a C compiler. Assembly? Well, each device usually has it's own assembler. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
MettaurSp
|
  |
| Joined: 20 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 3179 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 08:57 PM |
| It still is used whether the assemblers are different or not. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 09:09 PM |
| It is more like a different language for each device. Just because something is low-level, doesn't mean it is portable. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
MettaurSp
|
  |
| Joined: 20 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 3179 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 09:18 PM |
| I didn't exactly say lower level languages are more portable. I did say that due to it's nature, Asm is pretty universal. And from what I can tell, the only thing that changes with Asm variants would be mostly opcodes and registers. Other than that, I don't see any rule changes to it. And I am not considering framework code a part of Asm in this statement. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
cats247
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 1424 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 09:22 PM |
| What Chickenman is trying to say is that every platform has it's own implementation of Assembly. You can't write something in Assembly for x64 and expect it to run on a x32 system because they are different implementations. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
MettaurSp
|
  |
| Joined: 20 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 3179 |
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 09:24 PM |
| Meh, that is true. I was just taking "universal" into consideration and not "compatible". My point was that you can find it everywhere, I just wasn't thinking about compatibility. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 25 Nov 2013 10:04 PM |
That isn't really what I meant. The wla assembler for 658c16 or whatever is a fair bit different from nasm. Sure, you can have a "global" assembler, like the Gnu assembler or nasm, but most manufacturers have their own assembly language. Nasm doesn't support my proprietary chip, for example, but my super complex German assembler does.
Also, TI vs Seimens. Seimens products can be turned into anything, given the expected training period, but TI products serve one purpose, and only take an hour to learn. (Germany's over-engineering vs USA's KISS) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 07:55 AM |
Pseudocode
Then you figure out how to implement it in your target language of choice because it doesnt support some feature and you must mentally compile your pseudocode to something C-like. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
koen500
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2277 |
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 08:18 AM |
That one with the 0 and the 1. Everything is based of it.
But if you want to try elsewise...use Java, XML, or anything like that. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 08:40 AM |
"That one with the 0 and the 1."
That's binary (who doesn't know that?), which varies between processors and computer models and operating systems. Definitely not universal. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
koen500
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2277 |
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 09:42 AM |
| I couldn't find the name at that moment. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:22 AM |
| The one with the 1s and 0s in it(2) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:23 AM |
| Objection! ARM machine code and x86 machine code do not match! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:27 AM |
| also the one with the RGB's is Quite universal...i think? or is that the XML one |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Dr01d3k4
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 17916 |
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:29 AM |
| Javascript is probably the most universal for the major platforms - there are many libraries that allow to write in Javascript and deploy to web and mobile, but for more obscure platforms then it's probably C. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:34 AM |
| cool Thing of Java/Script are U don't Need to compile Loads for differnt OSes |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
RaidenJPN
|
  |
| Joined: 22 May 2013 |
| Total Posts: 6920 |
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 10:51 AM |
I believe C languages are the most universal,
though many would say Java is. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
suremark
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 6315 |
|
|
| 26 Nov 2013 11:21 AM |
I don't know how true this is, but I've heard java is implemented on many, many different types of devices such as cellphones & cars. That, and the fact that it seems to be growing pretty rapidly would make it a definite contender for the most universal language.
To repeat what others have said, though, C is also a very widespread language. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|