9
Are there other low-level languages besides Assembly? LISP is not (I think) nor Fortran..
Low-level language would be language closer to binary, as well as Assembly, language that works directly with hardware records.. High level would be close to English
20
It is the language that the CPU understands, composed of a binary sequence, whose rules are defined by each architecture.
The recommended is to generate through a compiler of another language of higher level,
but you can open a hex editor, and you can write everything using characters 0123456789abcdef, which is not very practical.
Then you will need a way to load the code in memory, unless you also write the bytes of the executable and already save as .exe.
Maintainability is very low, and it is impossible to comment on the code.
Other alternatives would be implementations of turing machines basic. There are several languages:
Brainfuck: this is to chip any human skull... is a minimalist language, Turing-Complete and therefore is able to do everything that any other language is able to do.
Wikipedia example - Program "Hello World!":
++++++++++[>++++++++>+++++++++++
>---------->+++>++++++++>+++++++
+++++>+++++++++++>++++++++++>+++
++++++++>+++<<<<<<<<<<-]>-.>--.>
++++.>++.>---.>---.>.>.>+.>+++.,
Online interpreter (go to google and type online brainfuck interpreter):
Piet: the language is programmed through a Bitmap... so there are many editors.
Example - test if a number is prime:
Other esoteric languages: The languages above are the ones I found most interesting but there are others. This Wikipedia link has a listing, which includes the previously presented.
Hardware description language are used to model the functioning of a hardware, assuming it is done using logic ports, rather than instructions interpreted by a CPU.
These languages can be run and debugged like any other, through a simulation of the logic gates, of the charge streams in the semiconductors, which in the end change Ddps and these are finally interpreted as signals 1 and 0, on/off, etc..
There are in this group of languages, those of lower level and higher level.
Example from wikipedia: VHDL
cmp : process
begin
if A = B then
C ⇐ 0;
else
C ⇐ 1;
end if;
end process cmp;
I found your answer +1 very interesting :)
You can put comments on a program written in hexadecimal if you put "jumps" in the right places. I honestly don’t understand why some people prefer high-level language if they can do everything using binary code... :p
@utluiz I had thought about it, but there would have to be a specialized editor to translate it 436f6d656e74e172696f therein Comentário... if well, that now that I remind you, that almost all Hexeditors have HEX visualization and also ASCII, then you could simulate a comment in this editor.
@utluiz Huahua... I can’t understand that either. The code is already overshadowed, which is a huge advantage for companies that want to protect the code. = P
@Breadcrumb code in hexa != from obfuscated rs
@Vitorcaleffi The concept of overshadowed depends on the ability of who is reading the code. Probably machine code, in hexa or any other base, goes beyond the capacity and patience of most people. That’s what I meant.
Browser other questions tagged characteristic-language assembly
You are not signed in. Login or sign up in order to post.
Machine language is still below Assembly, and in any case "Assembly" is not really a language - since each platform has its own assembly code. FOTRAN is higher than Assembly, but lower than C for example (and this lower than many others). And if you ask me, I’d say there’s no such thing as too much language high level that Lisp... : P (Lisp is practically "executable mathematics")
– mgibsonbr
@mgibsonbr did not answer the question ;)
– Jorge B.
I didn’t understand the -1
– Jorge B.
Set low level language. Your interpretation may be different from mine.
– Maniero
@bigown equivalent to Assembly.
– Jorge B.
@Jorgeb. the author, not you :)
– Maniero
I know, but I can tell by the question @bigown :P
– Jorge B.
I don’t think so. I think I can answer but the question is unclear. P/ Sopt standards it may look great, but p/ patterns of what has always been used in the SE lack relevant information to respond appropriately. I am not complaining about the question, much less who answered it, I could have done the same, but it could be much more informative to avoid ambiguity. If he gives a definition that matches mine, I have a good answer. If he confirms what you understand, then Miguel’s is already good.
– Maniero
@Jorgeb. If I had an answer, I would reply, not comment... : P I just wanted to illustrate that dividing languages between "low level" and "high level" is complicated, there is a whole spectrum that goes from "100% architecture compliant underneath" to "100% abstract". One can draw a line (as it was done in the old days) and say that "if it is compiled/interpreted, it is high-level" but this only reinforces the myth that every high-level language is equivalent.
– mgibsonbr
Punch card.
– ptkato