164
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Aquaphobi@lemmy.zip 21 points 14 hours ago

And I bet this is based in opinion and not any sort of scientific understanding because you put assembly as an obsolete language…

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 9 hours ago

I read that as "directly, without a compiler", in which case it's close to fair, although I would have still put it ahead of COBOL because sometimes it's necessary.

[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 hours ago

Should it not say "machine code" then? It would still be bizarre to call it obsolete, given that it's literally the foundation of all the other languages in the chart. It's like saying letters are obsolete because we have words now.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Why? An assembler isn't the same thing as a compiler. (Although, I'm not personally sure where the dividing line is. Where would literally just an assembler with loops instead of goto classify?)

The practice of directly using assembly is relatively obsolete. To bootstrap you might have to a bit, but writing Rollercoaster Tycoon in it was already an anachronism. I'm not really sure how to fit that into your analogy, because there's no word-compilers in wide use. If voice-to-text had became that dominant, typing would be obsolete, I guess.

[-] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world -4 points 13 hours ago

"Obsolete Lang" is more of a looks category, and back then most programming languages were not much dissimilar from it. Basically Assembly had to stay unstructured due to how CPUs work, while the industry moved on.

this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2025
164 points (78.3% liked)

Programmer Humor

25859 readers
1990 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS