Both of these do the same thing, in that they can take you from point A to point B. It's often impractical to use one or the other. ASM allows you to get from the terminal to the end of the runway. The 747 allows that, too, but if you only want to get to the end of the runway, the 747 is probably a poor choice. That's why I made the remark about the size of the code body. If it's in the range from 1E6 lines to 10E6 lines, 'C' or some other HLL might well be justified. Above 10 million lines, C++ or some other object-oriented tool set is probably indicated, since that will have to be done by a team.

The problem, viewed from where I sit, is a management issue, perhaps, but it's also an education issue.

The cost of microcontrollers, particularly those with on-board FLASH, has come WAY down. The density of that on-chip memory has gone WAY up. The availability of competent ASM programmers has gone WAY down, while the availability of young, 'C'-literate new-grad's has gone WAY up. Maintainability issues aside, it's a no-brainer for the managers, who, incidentally, often have no "brains" where the low-level details are concerned. The new-grad is cheaper than the ASM-experienced long-whiskered professional. Since most startups are designed with at least one eye to selling it once their market is established, the manager knows that he'll be elsewhere when the "issues" arise, and the programmer will be, too. The last thing the executive suite orders, before taking to their golden parachutes, is to replace the costly, capable people with the cheapest available. That increases the "numbers" that Wall Street likes to see.

If you're a low-priced youngster, BEWARE! If you're hired by a relatively new startup, you'll be working 30 hour days, 8 days a week until the company's been sold, after which you'll soon be unemployed (and without health insurance).

It's really all about taking the short-view, isn't it?

RE