Posting this off a 486

[ch_123]

At my college, assembly was done on 68000 r 8086 and 80186 boards, your choice.  I did 8086-186.

That's like getting the choice between getting a blowjob, or getting your balls whacked with a paddle, and picking the latter option.

[Findecanor]

That's like getting the choice between getting a blowjob, or getting your balls whacked with a paddle, and picking the latter option.

That is so true.

Back when I was in high school, I had programmed the 6502 on the C=64 for a few years, 68000 assembly on my Amiga, written a few AmigaOS utilities and operating system hacks. I had used the PC only in school, and got some ideas for a DOS extender. I went to my high school computer class teacher and asked if he had a book that would teach me how to program the PC in assembly language ... It did not take too many pages in that book before my excitement was quenched.

[msiegel]

instruction set reference, halfway down the page

http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/11130-where-can-i-find-a-book-on-mc68000-assembler-programming/

edit:

also:

[ch_123]

On the flipside, if you learned x86 assembly first, everything else (except perhaps IA64 assembly) will be a piss take in comparison...

Just don't do what I did, and learn 68k first, and then have to try and figure out what AMD64 assembler generated by gcc means...

[bladamson]

That's like getting the choice between getting a blowjob, or getting your balls whacked with a paddle, and picking the latter option.

You mean you wouldn't choose the latter option?  Hmm, I must have odd tastes...


Hmm, I guess I'd better find something else to reply to, so it doesn't look like I made this post just for the sake of saying something pervy...  Ah, here's one:

On the flipside, if you learned x86 assembly first, everything else (except perhaps IA64 assembly) will be a piss take in comparison...

Just don't do what I did, and learn 68k first, and then have to try and figure out what AMD64 assembler generated by gcc means...

Ya, I did a fair amount of 6502 assembler in the late 80s / early 90s and then tried to learn i386 asm when slackware started to become popular.  CISC instruction sets suck.

Intel and compatible chips especially.  They have so much vestigial crap, it makes me cringe. :3

[Konrad]

Meh, assembly is assembly. Every microcontroller and microprocessor model requires a peculiar variation in the instruction set and architecture. Learn one or three and you basically know them all - besides, the reality is that the majority of your projects will be written in higher code and the compilers will automate the assembly quirks away from you ... unless you absolutely need to squeeze every byte and every clock out for some kind of tricky hardware interface or whatever (in which case you might as well make things easier on yourself and just upgrade your project onto a faster chip).
 
The new C64 is here, booya! I just don't know if you can use your C64 software cartridges with it, let alone 5¼" floppies ...
 
Too bad there's no upgrade for Commodore's most excellent 1702 monitor.

[woody]

My 486DX4-100 (upgraded from a SX25) lasted through three power supplies and two cases.  I used that thing for EVER.

Quite similar - upgraded from 386SX-33 to 486DX4-120. Latter still in possession, although haven't seen power-on in 6 years.

[woody]

The new C64 is here, booya! I just don't know if you can use your C64 software cartridges with it, let alone 5¼" floppies ...

Slap emulators into just about anything!
Terrible website.

[ch_123]

Meh, assembly is assembly. Every microcontroller and microprocessor model requires a peculiar variation in the instruction set and architecture. Learn one or three and you basically know them all

Not really. Some are far more complicated than others.

[woody]

Like women - once you get past single-digit numbers, you start to get the pattern.

[microsoft windows]

That's like getting the choice between getting a blowjob, or getting your balls whacked with a paddle, and picking the latter option.

What if you're a female?

[NewbieOneKenobi]

I vaguely recall my buddy having a 486 (it was a high DX, 100 MHz or more, some of those beasts reached up to 133) with a 14.4 Kb modem back when it was current but my step-father might have had a 9.6 Kb modem on a low 486 SX (25 MHz IIRC), the same the M came with. Actually, I'm pretty sure he had the modem, just not sure which computer it was used with.

[Konrad]

IIRC, Intel's top 486 was DX4/100, while AMD (under the Intel brand) offered up to DX4/150; I still have an AMD i486DX4/120. At the time 25/33/40MHz FSB speeds were stable whereas 50MHz was not (at least not without being very selective and a little lucky with the rest of your mobo hardware/cards/RAM); external frequency multipliers only went to 3 or maybe 3.5. I might be wrong.