Re: A89: C and 68k?

To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: Re: A89: C and 68k?
From: "Dux Gregis" <assets@eden.rutgers.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:45:12 -0400
Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org



68k and C are very different.  You can compile C to run on almost any
microprocessor, including the 68k and the z80.  TI programmed the 89 in C
(TI probably saved money by programming it in C because C programmers are
cheaper and easier to find than asm programmers), but alot things that run
on intel processors were written in C as well.
If you want to know which language to learn, learn 68k: it's much more
efficient.


>
>It can't be that much of a difference because TI programs the TI-89 in C.
>You know the ROM calls and stuff.
>     Pat
>________________
>   pat@jalyn.com
>http://come.to/patj/
>-----Original Message-----
>From: BLoWh0Le@aol.com <BLoWh0Le@aol.com>
>To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
>Date: Sunday, September 27, 1998 9:35 PM
>Subject: Re: A89: C and 68k?
>
>
>>
>>In a message dated 98-09-27 21:39:58 EDT, you write:
>>
>><< Are C and 68k languages alike? >>
>>
>>i don't think so.  but then again i'm probably wrong.
>>
>>C is a programming language.
>>68k is a motorola processor.
>>there might be a C compiler for the 68k, but i wouldn't know.
>>otherwise, i think you have to program in pure asm for the 68k.
>>
>