Technology, Support, and News Forum

[DRAGON OF DARKNESS Profile]

Yes u would have to to program.

[imnuts Profile Website]

dreamweaver makes html easy too cause you can create stuff in design view and then see the code that makes the output helping you to learn html

[DRAGON OF DARKNESS Profile]

I learned A LOT about html in dreamweaver. Mostly i used design view and that helped me (like imnuts said) learn coding.

[imnuts Profile Website]

i use the split view so i can do the coding, refresh and see the output of it. definitely worth the cost if your going into web design in my opinion

[DRAGON OF DARKNESS Profile]

Yes i recommend Macromedia Studio MX 2004.

[Weaver Profile Website]

Sweet thanks guys! Started on HTML lat night.. seems really easy so far. CSS seem a bit confusing though, maybe thats the next step.

Weaver I asked the question knowing that there are most likely aswers already in the forum.. I just didnt want old suggestions from 2003 or later or from people that have since left the forums. However I do admit to not even bothering to look! I guess I really am just as lazy as the next guy =p I usally acutally search for most of my stuff. Unless its info that quickly becomes out dated. -Sorry-

I'll post a link to a site I made and you all can tell me if I have done something wrong.
Do you all think I should become great at HTML before I move on to PHP or Pythonn [Weaver suggested those]?

Thankx again for the info ....

You should know HTML (and CSS) well enough to write moderately complex pages by hand in a text editor like Vim or Textpad. Once you have confidence in your HTML and CSS abilities, it is time to move on to PHP/Python. Personally, I would suggest PHP, but I have nothing against Python.

After you have a real language like PHP/Python under your belt, then move up to "the big boy languages" like C/C++/Java.

One other thing, somewhere around the time of learning C/C++/Java, it would be in your best interest to learn an assembly language. High level languages are very powerful in terms of how easy they make programming, but truly understanding machine architecture and code generation is a skill that will only enhance your abilities when programming in a high level language.

-Weaver

[martini_thief Profile]

Assembly language? It seems I have ALOT to learn =\ not that I ever thought I didnt but I can't say as I have ever heard of assembly language!

Something tells me Weaver i about 30 - 40 steps ahead of me =P and able to do all the stuff I only have began to think about doing =\

Ahh well have to start somewhere off to HTML I go (seems this html stuff is EXTREAMLY easy if you have all the codes printed out, is that cheating?)

[DRAGON OF DARKNESS Profile]

Nothing is cheating in HTML. Dont worry about that printed out stuff. Evently you wont need it.

[Weaver Profile Website]

Assembly language in its true form is one step above machine language. Machine language is all binary formatted for a particular architecture. It would be a real pain to code in binary, so an abstraction was made. Assembly language in its true form shares a one-to-one relationship with the machine code instructions that the processor is familiar with.

This means that a single instruction in assembly is a single machine code instruction. However, this is not always the case. Most assembly languages aren't "true" assembly languages anymore. To ease even an assembly programmer's life, certain abstractions are made and certain assembly instructions may have a one to many relationship with machine code instructions.

What is the point of assembly you ask? It is about as low level as you can get. You cannot have more control over the CPU than with assembly. As such, assembly used to be used when execution speed was mandatory. Now, most compilers have gotten to the point where the speed difference for most code is not significant.

Where has assembly gone? It has disappeared. It been overshadowed by High Level Languages like C/C++ and even higher level languages like Java. If you on not familiar with the compilation process, you should know that all HLL languages eventually get turned into assembly and then machine code. That is essentially what a compiler does, it translates your HLL code into assembly. Then the assembler turns the assembly into machine code. Then, after linking, your code should be executable in your environment (assuming you are building an executable binary and not just a library object).

One important thing to note about assembly is that it is not portable across architectures. By architectures I mean ISA's. P4's, Athlon's, C3's are all part of the x86 architecture (which Intel refers to as IA-32). The SPARC and MIPS architectures are examples of others. Keep in mind that each "root architecture" also has versions. MIPS32 and MIPS64 are examples of different architectures within the MIPS architecture. The 386, 486, 586, and 686 lines are all examples of architectures wihin x86. Each sub-architecture generally adds/removes pieces/functionality.

So, if I were to write an assembly program in MIPS assembly and then try to assemble it on an x86 machine, it would not work. This is because the architectures are fundamentally different, and thus have different assembly and machine code. This is another reason why high level languages have exploded in terms of popularity. In addition to being able to accomplish more in the same amount of time, high level languages offer machine independence. I write my C program in C, that is all I care about. The compiler takes care of the rest. Whether the compiler compiles my C code into MIPS or x86 assembly doesn't matter, my work is done.

To give you an idea of what assembly looks like, here is a fragment of a program I wrote for a MIPS assembly class last semester.

Code: Select all

process:
        la $10, string
        lb $11, char

        for:
                ble $16, $0, not_contained
                lb $12, ($10)
                beq $12, $11, contained         #If found, branch to contained
                add $10, $10, 1
                sub $16, $16, 1
                b for

contained:
        la $14, output_success
        puts $14
        b end

not_contained:
        la $14, output_failure
        puts $14

end:


Instructions are one per line, arguments are separated by commas. I am not gonig to try and explain what this does as this is not a course on assembly. (In addition, it is only about 10% of the overall program so it will be hard without being able to see the rest).

Like I mentioned before, knowing assembly gives you a real appreciation for what is going on underneath that high level code you produce. Not only that, but it will allow you to produce more efficient high level code (if you learn assembly well) which is never frowned upon... never, no matter what those Java programmers tell you.

-Weaver

[Hugo van Dijk Profile Website]

i always wanted to programm a ic (a pic), in basic or jal.



But still havent done it