Ttdfjt

What is this dime sized black bug with white on the segments near Loveland Colorodao?

How is dynamic resistance of a diode modeled for large voltage variations?

What was the primary motivation for a historical figure like Xenophon to create an extensive collection of written material?

Farthing / Riding

3D Histogram / bar chart

What quantum phenomena violate the superposition principle in electromagnetism?

Why is this python script running in background consuming 100 % CPU?

What Species of Trees are These?

How can sister protect herself from impulse purchases with a credit card?

Keeping the dodos out of the field

Germany rejected my entry to Schengen countries

why "American-born", not "America-born"?

Do 'destroy' effects count as damage?

Warped chessboard

Is there a realtime, uncut video of Saturn V ignition through tower clear?

Is my company merging branches wrong?

Filter a file list against an integer array?

How to play vs. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6?

Removing Doubles Destroy Topology

Was murdering a slave illegal in American slavery, and if so, what punishments were given for it?

Will this series of events work to drown the Tarrasque?

Was Tyrion always a poor strategist?

Department head said that group project may be rejected. How to mitigate?

Why was Harry at the Weasleys' at the beginning of Goblet of Fire but at the Dursleys' after?

Assembly writer vs compiler in VLIW architecture

Conversion from assembly program to low-level machine languageWhat do I need to study in order to understand and design a programming language?What defines a tool as a “compiler”is the problem of parallelising any program, NP-complete?What's the advantage of typed assembly?Implementing a Compiler with MacrosThe difference between compiler and interpreterIs it possible to tell if two sequences of assembly instructions are semantically equivalent?High Level Assemblers vs Compilers?Do “compiler” and “assembler” correspond to frontend and backend phases of a compiler?

8

2

$begingroup$

I read this sentence in a book:

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel.

What is the difference between assembly writer and compiler? Would an assembly writer also mean the same as assembler?

compilers assembly

share|cite|improve this question

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

8

2

$begingroup$

I read this sentence in a book:

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel.

What is the difference between assembly writer and compiler? Would an assembly writer also mean the same as assembler?

compilers assembly

share|cite|improve this question

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I read this sentence in a book:

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel.

What is the difference between assembly writer and compiler? Would an assembly writer also mean the same as assembler?

compilers assembly

share|cite|improve this question

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this question

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|cite|improve this question

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

edited May 15 at 5:11

Discrete lizard♦

5,09811642

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

New contributor

Dasha Sham is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked May 14 at 5:02

Dasha ShamDasha Sham

435

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

32

$begingroup$

The "assembly writer" in that book is a human software developer who writes code in assembler language.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  15
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  1. interpreter doesn't convert anything to assembly language. 2. Any tool that converts source code to assembly language is by definition a compiler.
  $endgroup$
  – gnasher729
  May 14 at 7:10
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French an assembler converts assembly language code to machine code, so with this definition it isn't a compiler. If, however, you have a tool that converts one assembly language into another (e.g. ARBfp1.0 to native assembly language of a modern GPU), this tool is a compiler (with this definition).
  $endgroup$
  – Ruslan
  May 14 at 19:38
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @gnasher729 - nitpick: by most definitions, the "Assembly language" part of (2) is unnecessary (notably, things like the typescript compiler or the java compiler, neither of which compile the source to assembly, but compile to javascript or java bytecode respectively). More recently it generally means any tool which compiles one programming language into another programming language (and assembly is technically a programming language).
  $endgroup$
  – Delioth
  May 14 at 21:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: A compiler is a program that translates a program in language X into a semantically equivalent program in language Y. Depending on what exactly the languages X and Y are, we have special names for those compilers, and "assembler" is one of those special names. But they are all special kinds of compilers. E.g. if Y = assembly and X is higher-level than Y, then we call it an assembler. If Y = assembly and X is lower-level than Y, we call it a disassembler. If X is lower-level than Y and Y != assembly, we call it a de-compiler. If X and Y are the same level, recent usage would …
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 15 at 12:48
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: I guess the reason why assemblers aren't typically talked about much in terms of compilers is that assemblers are very boring compilers. At its core, an assembler is just a 1:1 mapping of human-readable mnemonics to machine-readable opcodes. The parsing stage is simple, there are no types, there are no optimizations, the code generation is trivial. None of the interesting algorithmitic stuff that compilers do is present: parsing a complex language, type checking, type inference, optimizations, clever mapping of semantics etc.
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 16 at 5:10
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 6 more comments

9

$begingroup$

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel

The meaning of this sentence is that in VLIW architecture, assembler (machine) code defines which instruction will be executed in parallel, so it's fixed at the time assembly code is written by a human or generated by a compiler.

This differs from super-scalar cpus, where instructions may be executed in parallel, this is a decision made by CPU each time it executes the instructions.

There are also CPUs that combine both approaches - Itanium2 is backward-compatible with Itanium, packing 3 instructions into VLIW word. But, afair, Itanium2 can execute two such packs in the single CPU cycle, and this decision is made at execution time.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "419"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

Dasha Sham is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcs.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f109326%2fassembly-writer-vs-compiler-in-vliw-architecture%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

32

$begingroup$

The "assembly writer" in that book is a human software developer who writes code in assembler language.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  15
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  1. interpreter doesn't convert anything to assembly language. 2. Any tool that converts source code to assembly language is by definition a compiler.
  $endgroup$
  – gnasher729
  May 14 at 7:10
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French an assembler converts assembly language code to machine code, so with this definition it isn't a compiler. If, however, you have a tool that converts one assembly language into another (e.g. ARBfp1.0 to native assembly language of a modern GPU), this tool is a compiler (with this definition).
  $endgroup$
  – Ruslan
  May 14 at 19:38
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @gnasher729 - nitpick: by most definitions, the "Assembly language" part of (2) is unnecessary (notably, things like the typescript compiler or the java compiler, neither of which compile the source to assembly, but compile to javascript or java bytecode respectively). More recently it generally means any tool which compiles one programming language into another programming language (and assembly is technically a programming language).
  $endgroup$
  – Delioth
  May 14 at 21:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: A compiler is a program that translates a program in language X into a semantically equivalent program in language Y. Depending on what exactly the languages X and Y are, we have special names for those compilers, and "assembler" is one of those special names. But they are all special kinds of compilers. E.g. if Y = assembly and X is higher-level than Y, then we call it an assembler. If Y = assembly and X is lower-level than Y, we call it a disassembler. If X is lower-level than Y and Y != assembly, we call it a de-compiler. If X and Y are the same level, recent usage would …
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 15 at 12:48
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: I guess the reason why assemblers aren't typically talked about much in terms of compilers is that assemblers are very boring compilers. At its core, an assembler is just a 1:1 mapping of human-readable mnemonics to machine-readable opcodes. The parsing stage is simple, there are no types, there are no optimizations, the code generation is trivial. None of the interesting algorithmitic stuff that compilers do is present: parsing a complex language, type checking, type inference, optimizations, clever mapping of semantics etc.
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 16 at 5:10
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 6 more comments

32

$begingroup$

The "assembly writer" in that book is a human software developer who writes code in assembler language.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  15
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  1. interpreter doesn't convert anything to assembly language. 2. Any tool that converts source code to assembly language is by definition a compiler.
  $endgroup$
  – gnasher729
  May 14 at 7:10
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French an assembler converts assembly language code to machine code, so with this definition it isn't a compiler. If, however, you have a tool that converts one assembly language into another (e.g. ARBfp1.0 to native assembly language of a modern GPU), this tool is a compiler (with this definition).
  $endgroup$
  – Ruslan
  May 14 at 19:38
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @gnasher729 - nitpick: by most definitions, the "Assembly language" part of (2) is unnecessary (notably, things like the typescript compiler or the java compiler, neither of which compile the source to assembly, but compile to javascript or java bytecode respectively). More recently it generally means any tool which compiles one programming language into another programming language (and assembly is technically a programming language).
  $endgroup$
  – Delioth
  May 14 at 21:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: A compiler is a program that translates a program in language X into a semantically equivalent program in language Y. Depending on what exactly the languages X and Y are, we have special names for those compilers, and "assembler" is one of those special names. But they are all special kinds of compilers. E.g. if Y = assembly and X is higher-level than Y, then we call it an assembler. If Y = assembly and X is lower-level than Y, we call it a disassembler. If X is lower-level than Y and Y != assembly, we call it a de-compiler. If X and Y are the same level, recent usage would …
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 15 at 12:48
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @KellyS.French: I guess the reason why assemblers aren't typically talked about much in terms of compilers is that assemblers are very boring compilers. At its core, an assembler is just a 1:1 mapping of human-readable mnemonics to machine-readable opcodes. The parsing stage is simple, there are no types, there are no optimizations, the code generation is trivial. None of the interesting algorithmitic stuff that compilers do is present: parsing a complex language, type checking, type inference, optimizations, clever mapping of semantics etc.
  $endgroup$
  – Jörg W Mittag
  May 16 at 5:10
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 6 more comments

$begingroup$

The "assembly writer" in that book is a human software developer who writes code in assembler language.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

answered May 14 at 6:30

gnasher729gnasher729

12.9k1623

9

$begingroup$

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel

The meaning of this sentence is that in VLIW architecture, assembler (machine) code defines which instruction will be executed in parallel, so it's fixed at the time assembly code is written by a human or generated by a compiler.

This differs from super-scalar cpus, where instructions may be executed in parallel, this is a decision made by CPU each time it executes the instructions.

There are also CPUs that combine both approaches - Itanium2 is backward-compatible with Itanium, packing 3 instructions into VLIW word. But, afair, Itanium2 can execute two such packs in the single CPU cycle, and this decision is made at execution time.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

9

$begingroup$

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel

The meaning of this sentence is that in VLIW architecture, assembler (machine) code defines which instruction will be executed in parallel, so it's fixed at the time assembly code is written by a human or generated by a compiler.

This differs from super-scalar cpus, where instructions may be executed in parallel, this is a decision made by CPU each time it executes the instructions.

There are also CPUs that combine both approaches - Itanium2 is backward-compatible with Itanium, packing 3 instructions into VLIW word. But, afair, Itanium2 can execute two such packs in the single CPU cycle, and this decision is made at execution time.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

In VLIW architecture, the compiler/and or assembly writer chooses instructions that can be executed in parallel

The meaning of this sentence is that in VLIW architecture, assembler (machine) code defines which instruction will be executed in parallel, so it's fixed at the time assembly code is written by a human or generated by a compiler.

This differs from super-scalar cpus, where instructions may be executed in parallel, this is a decision made by CPU each time it executes the instructions.

There are also CPUs that combine both approaches - Itanium2 is backward-compatible with Itanium, packing 3 instructions into VLIW word. But, afair, Itanium2 can execute two such packs in the single CPU cycle, and this decision is made at execution time.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612

answered May 14 at 7:29

BulatBulat

1,221612