Assembly language

In computer programming, assembly language

Assembly language
(alternatively assembler language[1] or symbolic
machine code),[2][3][4] often referred to simply as
assembly and commonly abbreviated as ASM or
asm, is any low-level programming language with a
very strong correspondence between the instructions
in the language and the architecture's machine code
instructions.[5] Assembly language usually has one
statement per machine instruction (1:1), but constants,
comments, assembler directives,[6] symbolic labels of,
e.g., memory locations, registers, and macros[7][1] are
generally also supported.

The first assembly code in which a language is used to

represent machine code instructions is found in
Kathleen and Andrew Donald Booth's 1947 work,
Coding for A.R.C..[8] Assembly code is converted into
executable machine code by a utility program referred
to as an assembler. The term "assembler" is generally
attributed to Wilkes, Wheeler and Gill in their 1951
book The Preparation of Programs for an Electronic
Digital Computer,[9] who, however, used the term to
mean "a program that assembles another program
consisting of several sections into a single
program".[10] The conversion process is referred to as
Typical secondary output from an assembler—
assembly, as in assembling the source code. The
showing original assembly language (right) for
computational step when an assembler is processing a
the Motorola MC6800 and the assembled form
program is called assembly time.
Paradigm Imperative, unstructured, often
Because assembly depends on the machine code metaprogramming (through
instructions, each assembly language[nb 1] is specific macros), certain assemblers
to a particular computer architecture.[11][12][13] are structured or object-
oriented
Sometimes there is more than one assembler for the
First appeared 1947
same architecture, and sometimes an assembler is
Typing None
specific to an operating system or to particular
discipline
operating systems. Most assembly languages do not
provide specific syntax for operating system calls, and Filename .asm, .s, .S, .inc, .wla,
most assembly languages can be used universally with extensions .SRC as well as several others
any operating system,[nb 2] as the language provides depending on the assembler
access to all the real capabilities of the processor,
upon which all system call mechanisms ultimately rest. In contrast to assembly languages, most high-
level programming languages are generally portable across multiple architectures but require interpreting
or compiling, much more complicated tasks than assembling.

In the first decades of computing, it was commonplace for both systems programming and application
programming to take place entirely in assembly language. While still irreplaceable for some purposes, the
majority of programming is now conducted in higher-level interpreted and compiled languages. In "No
Silver Bullet", Fred Brooks summarised the effects of the switch away from assembly language
programming: "Surely the most powerful stroke for software productivity, reliability, and simplicity has
been the progressive use of high-level languages for programming. Most observers credit that
development with at least a factor of five in productivity, and with concomitant gains in reliability,
simplicity, and comprehensibility."[14]

Today, it is typical to use small amounts of assembly language code within larger systems implemented in
a higher-level language, for performance reasons or to interact directly with hardware in ways
unsupported by the higher-level language. For instance, just under 2% of version 4.9 of the Linux kernel
source code is written in assembly; more than 97% is written in C.[15]

Assembly language syntax

Assembly language uses a mnemonic to represent, e.g., each low-level machine instruction or opcode,
each directive, typically also each architectural register, flag, etc. Some of the mnemonics may be built-in
and some user-defined. Many operations require one or more operands in order to form a complete
instruction. Most assemblers permit named constants, registers, and labels for program and memory
locations, and can calculate expressions for operands. Thus, programmers are freed from tedious
repetitive calculations and assembler programs are much more readable than machine code. Depending
on the architecture, these elements may also be combined for specific instructions or addressing modes
using offsets or other data as well as fixed addresses. Many assemblers offer additional mechanisms to
facilitate program development, to control the assembly process, and to aid debugging.

Some are column oriented, with specific fields in specific columns; this was very common for machines
using punched cards in the 1950s and early 1960s. Some assemblers have free-form syntax, with fields
separated by delimiters, e.g., punctuation, white space. Some assemblers are hybrid, with, e.g., labels, in a
specific column and other fields separated by delimiters; this became more common than column-
oriented syntax in the 1960s.

Terminology
A macro assembler is an assembler that includes a macroinstruction facility so that
(parameterized) assembly language text can be represented by a name, and that name can
be used to insert the expanded text into other code.
Open code refers to any assembler input outside of a macro definition.
A cross assembler (see also cross compiler) is an assembler that is run on a computer or
operating system (the host system) of a different type from the system on which the
resulting code is to run (the target system). Cross-assembling facilitates the development of
programs for systems that do not have the resources to support software development,
 such as an embedded system or a microcontroller. In such a case, the resulting object code
must be transferred to the target system, via read-only memory (ROM, EPROM, etc.), a
programmer (when the read-only memory is integrated in the device, as in microcontrollers),
or a data link using either an exact bit-by-bit copy of the object code or a text-based
representation of that code (such as Intel hex or Motorola S-record).
A high-level assembler is a program that provides language abstractions more often
associated with high-level languages, such as advanced control structures (IF/THEN/ELSE,
DO CASE, etc.) and high-level abstract data types, including structures/records, unions,
classes, and sets.
A microassembler is a program that helps prepare a microprogram to control the low level
operation of a computer.
A meta-assembler is "a program that accepts the syntactic and semantic description of an
assembly language, and generates an assembler for that language",[16] or that accepts an
assembler source file along with such a description and assembles the source file in
accordance with that description. "Meta-Symbol" assemblers for the SDS 9 Series and SDS
Sigma series of computers are meta-assemblers.[17] Sperry Univac also provided a Meta-
Assembler for the UNIVAC 1100/2200 series.[18]
inline assembler (or embedded assembler) is assembler code contained within a high-
level language program.[19] This is most often used in systems programs which need direct
access to the hardware.

Key concepts

Assembler
An assembler program creates object code by translating combinations of mnemonics and syntax for
operations and addressing modes into their numerical equivalents. This representation typically includes
an operation code ("opcode") as well as other control bits and data. The assembler also calculates
constant expressions and resolves symbolic names for memory locations and other entities.[20] The use of
symbolic references is a key feature of assemblers, saving tedious calculations and manual address
updates after program modifications. Most assemblers also include macro facilities for performing textual
substitution – e.g., to generate common short sequences of instructions as inline, instead of called
subroutines.

Some assemblers may also be able to perform some simple types of instruction set-specific optimizations.
One concrete example of this may be the ubiquitous x86 assemblers from various vendors. Called jump-
sizing,[20] most of them are able to perform jump-instruction replacements (long jumps replaced by short
or relative jumps) in any number of passes, on request. Others may even do simple rearrangement or
insertion of instructions, such as some assemblers for RISC architectures that can help optimize a sensible
instruction scheduling to exploit the CPU pipeline as efficiently as possible.[21]

Assemblers have been available since the 1950s, as the first step above machine language and before
high-level programming languages such as Fortran, Algol, COBOL and Lisp. There have also been
several classes of translators and semi-automatic code generators with properties similar to both assembly
and high-level languages, with Speedcode as perhaps one of the better-known examples.
There may be several assemblers with different syntax for a particular CPU or instruction set architecture.
For instance, an instruction to add memory data to a register in a x86-family processor might be add
eax,[ebx], in original Intel syntax, whereas this would be written addl (%ebx),%eax in the
AT&T syntax used by the GNU Assembler. Despite different appearances, different syntactic forms
generally generate the same numeric machine code. A single assembler may also have different modes in
order to support variations in syntactic forms as well as their exact semantic interpretations (such as
FASM-syntax, TASM-syntax, ideal mode, etc., in the special case of x86 assembly programming).

Number of passes
There are two types of assemblers based on how many passes through the source are needed (how many
times the assembler reads the source) to produce the object file.

One-pass assemblers process the source code once. For symbols used before they are
defined, the assembler will emit "errata" after the eventual definition, telling the linker or the
loader to patch the locations where the as yet undefined symbols had been used.
Multi-pass assemblers create a table with all symbols and their values in the first passes,
then use the table in later passes to generate code.
In both cases, the assembler must be able to determine the size of each instruction on the initial passes in
order to calculate the addresses of subsequent symbols. This means that if the size of an operation
referring to an operand defined later depends on the type or distance of the operand, the assembler will
make a pessimistic estimate when first encountering the operation, and if necessary, pad it with one or
more "no-operation" instructions in a later pass or the errata. In an assembler with peephole optimization,
addresses may be recalculated between passes to allow replacing pessimistic code with code tailored to
the exact distance from the target.

The original reason for the use of one-pass assemblers was memory size and speed of assembly – often a
second pass would require storing the symbol table in memory (to handle forward references), rewinding
and rereading the program source on tape, or rereading a deck of cards or punched paper tape. Later
computers with much larger memories (especially disc storage), had the space to perform all necessary
processing without such re-reading. The advantage of the multi-pass assembler is that the absence of
errata makes the linking process (or the program load if the assembler directly produces executable code)
faster.[22]

Example: in the following code snippet, a one-pass assembler would be able to determine the address of
the backward reference BKWD when assembling statement S2, but would not be able to determine the
address of the forward reference FWD when assembling the branch statement S1; indeed, FWD may be
undefined. A two-pass assembler would determine both addresses in pass 1, so they would be known
when generating code in pass 2.

S1 B FWD
...
FWD EQU *
...
BKWD EQU *
...
S2 B BKWD

High-level assemblers
More sophisticated high-level assemblers provide language abstractions such as:

High-level procedure/function declarations and invocations

Advanced control structures (IF/THEN/ELSE, SWITCH)
High-level abstract data types, including structures/records, unions, classes, and sets
Sophisticated macro processing (although available on ordinary assemblers since the late
1950s for, e.g., the IBM 700 series and IBM 7000 series, and since the 1960s for IBM
System/360 (S/360), amongst other machines)
Object-oriented programming features such as classes, objects, abstraction, polymorphism,
and inheritance[23]
See Language design below for more details.

Assembly language
A program written in assembly language consists of a series of mnemonic processor instructions and
meta-statements (known variously as declarative operations, directives, pseudo-instructions, pseudo-
operations and pseudo-ops), comments and data. Assembly language instructions usually consist of an
opcode mnemonic followed by an operand, which might be a list of data, arguments or parameters.[24]
Some instructions may be "implied", which means the data upon which the instruction operates is
implicitly defined by the instruction itself—such an instruction does not take an operand. The resulting
statement is translated by an assembler into machine language instructions that can be loaded into
memory and executed.

For example, the instruction below tells an x86/IA-32 processor to move an immediate 8-bit value into a
register. The binary code for this instruction is 10110 followed by a 3-bit identifier for which register to
use. The identifier for the AL register is 000, so the following machine code loads the AL register with the
data 01100001.[24]

10110000 01100001

This binary computer code can be made more human-readable by expressing it in hexadecimal as
follows.

B0 61

Here, B0 means "Move a copy of the following value into AL", and 61 is a hexadecimal representation of
the value 01100001, which is 97 in decimal. Assembly language for the 8086 family provides the
mnemonic MOV (an abbreviation of move) for instructions such as this, so the machine code above can
be written as follows in assembly language, complete with an explanatory comment if required, after the
semicolon. This is much easier to read and to remember.

MOV AL, 61h ; Load AL with 97 decimal (61 hex)

In some assembly languages (including this one) the same mnemonic, such as MOV, may be used for a
family of related instructions for loading, copying and moving data, whether these are immediate values,
values in registers, or memory locations pointed to by values in registers or by immediate (a.k.a. direct)
addresses. Other assemblers may use separate opcode mnemonics such as L for "move memory to
register", ST for "move register to memory", LR for "move register to register", MVI for "move
immediate operand to memory", etc.

If the same mnemonic is used for different instructions, that means that the mnemonic corresponds to
several different binary instruction codes, excluding data (e.g. the 61h in this example), depending on the
operands that follow the mnemonic. For example, for the x86/IA-32 CPUs, the Intel assembly language
syntax MOV AL, AH represents an instruction that moves the contents of register AH into register AL.
The[nb 3] hexadecimal form of this instruction is:

88 E0

The first byte, 88h, identifies a move between a byte-sized register and either another register or memory,
and the second byte, E0h, is encoded (with three bit-fields) to specify that both operands are registers, the
source is AH, and the destination is AL.

In a case like this where the same mnemonic can represent more than one binary instruction, the
assembler determines which instruction to generate by examining the operands. In the first example, the
operand 61h is a valid hexadecimal numeric constant and is not a valid register name, so only the B0
instruction can be applicable. In the second example, the operand AH is a valid register name and not a
valid numeric constant (hexadecimal, decimal, octal, or binary), so only the 88 instruction can be
applicable.

Assembly languages are always designed so that this sort of lack of ambiguity is universally enforced by
their syntax. For example, in the Intel x86 assembly language, a hexadecimal constant must start with a
numeral digit, so that the hexadecimal number 'A' (equal to decimal ten) would be written as 0Ah or
0AH, not AH, specifically so that it cannot appear to be the name of register AH. (The same rule also
prevents ambiguity with the names of registers BH, CH, and DH, as well as with any user-defined symbol
that ends with the letter H and otherwise contains only characters that are hexadecimal digits, such as the
word "BEACH".)

Returning to the original example, while the x86 opcode 10110000 (B0) copies an 8-bit value into the AL
register, 10110001 (B1) moves it into CL and 10110010 (B2) does so into DL. Assembly language
examples for these follow.[24]

MOV AL, 1h ; Load AL with immediate value 1

MOV CL, 2h ; Load CL with immediate value 2
MOV DL, 3h ; Load DL with immediate value 3

The syntax of MOV can also be more complex as the following examples show.[25]

MOV EAX, [EBX] ; Move the 4 bytes in memory at the address contained in EBX into EAX
MOV [ESI+EAX], CL ; Move the contents of CL into the byte at address ESI+EAX
MOV DS, DX ; Move the contents of DX into segment register DS

In each case, the MOV mnemonic is translated directly into one of the opcodes 88-8C, 8E, A0-A3, B0-
BF, C6 or C7 by an assembler, and the programmer normally does not have to know or remember
which.[24]
Transforming assembly language into machine code is the job of an assembler, and the reverse can at
least partially be achieved by a disassembler. Unlike high-level languages, there is a one-to-one
correspondence between many simple assembly statements and machine language instructions. However,
in some cases, an assembler may provide pseudoinstructions (essentially macros) which expand into
several machine language instructions to provide commonly needed functionality. For example, for a
machine that lacks a "branch if greater or equal" instruction, an assembler may provide a
pseudoinstruction that expands to the machine's "set if less than" and "branch if zero (on the result of the
set instruction)". Most full-featured assemblers also provide a rich macro language (discussed below)
which is used by vendors and programmers to generate more complex code and data sequences. Since the
information about pseudoinstructions and macros defined in the assembler environment is not present in
the object program, a disassembler cannot reconstruct the macro and pseudoinstruction invocations but
can only disassemble the actual machine instructions that the assembler generated from those abstract
assembly-language entities. Likewise, since comments in the assembly language source file are ignored
by the assembler and have no effect on the object code it generates, a disassembler is always completely
unable to recover source comments.

Each computer architecture has its own machine language. Computers differ in the number and type of
operations they support, in the different sizes and numbers of registers, and in the representations of data
in storage. While most general-purpose computers are able to carry out essentially the same functionality,
the ways they do so differ; the corresponding assembly languages reflect these differences.

Multiple sets of mnemonics or assembly-language syntax may exist for a single instruction set, typically
instantiated in different assembler programs. In these cases, the most popular one is usually that supplied
by the CPU manufacturer and used in its documentation.

Two examples of CPUs that have two different sets of mnemonics are the Intel 8080 family and the Intel
8086/8088. Because Intel claimed copyright on its assembly language mnemonics (on each page of their
documentation published in the 1970s and early 1980s, at least), some companies that independently
produced CPUs compatible with Intel instruction sets invented their own mnemonics. The Zilog Z80
CPU, an enhancement of the Intel 8080A, supports all the 8080A instructions plus many more; Zilog
invented an entirely new assembly language, not only for the new instructions but also for all of the
8080A instructions. For example, where Intel uses the mnemonics MOV, MVI, LDA, STA, LXI, LDAX,
STAX, LHLD, and SHLD for various data transfer instructions, the Z80 assembly language uses the
mnemonic LD for all of them. A similar case is the NEC V20 and V30 CPUs, enhanced copies of the Intel
8086 and 8088, respectively. Like Zilog with the Z80, NEC invented new mnemonics for all of the 8086
and 8088 instructions, to avoid accusations of infringement of Intel's copyright. (It is questionable
whether such copyrights can be valid, and later CPU companies such as AMD[nb 4] and Cyrix republished
Intel's x86/IA-32 instruction mnemonics exactly with neither permission nor legal penalty.) It is doubtful
whether in practice many people who programmed the V20 and V30 actually wrote in NEC's assembly
language rather than Intel's; since any two assembly languages for the same instruction set architecture
are isomorphic (somewhat like English and Pig Latin), there is no requirement to use a manufacturer's
own published assembly language with that manufacturer's products.

"Hello, world!" on x86 Linux

In 32-bit assembly language for Linux on an x86 processor, "Hello, world!" can be printed like this.
 section .text
global _start

_start:
mov edx,len ; length of string, third argument to write()
mov ecx,msg ; address of string, second argument to write()
mov ebx,1 ; file descriptor (standard output), first argument to write()
mov eax,4 ; system call number for write()
int 0x80 ; system call trap

mov ebx,0 ; exit code, first argument to exit()

mov eax,1 ; system call number for exit()
int 0x80 ; system call trap

section .data
msg db 'Hello, world!', 0xa
len equ $ - msg

Language design

Basic elements
There is a large degree of diversity in the way the authors of assemblers categorize statements and in the
nomenclature that they use. In particular, some describe anything other than a machine mnemonic or
extended mnemonic as a pseudo-operation (pseudo-op). A typical assembly language consists of 3 types
of instruction statements that are used to define program operations:

Opcode mnemonics
Data definitions
Assembly directives

Opcode mnemonics and extended mnemonics

Instructions (statements) in assembly language are generally very simple, unlike those in high-level
languages. Generally, a mnemonic is a symbolic name for a single executable machine language
instruction (an opcode), and there is at least one opcode mnemonic defined for each machine language
instruction. Each instruction typically consists of an operation or opcode plus zero or more operands.
Most instructions refer to a single value or a pair of values. Operands can be immediate (value coded in
the instruction itself), registers specified in the instruction or implied, or the addresses of data located
elsewhere in storage. This is determined by the underlying processor architecture: the assembler merely
reflects how this architecture works. Extended mnemonics are often used to specify a combination of an
opcode with a specific operand, e.g., the System/360 assemblers use B as an extended mnemonic for BC
with a mask of 15 and NOP ("NO OPeration" – do nothing for one step) for BC with a mask of 0.

Extended mnemonics are often used to support specialized uses of instructions, often for purposes not
obvious from the instruction name. For example, many CPU's do not have an explicit NOP instruction,
but do have instructions that can be used for the purpose. In 8086 CPUs the instruction xchg ax,ax is
used for nop, with nop being a pseudo-opcode to encode the instruction xchg ax,ax. Some
disassemblers recognize this and will decode the xchg ax,ax instruction as nop. Similarly, IBM
assemblers for System/360 and System/370 use the extended mnemonics NOP and NOPR for BC and BCR
with zero masks. For the SPARC architecture, these are known as synthetic instructions.[26]
Some assemblers also support simple built-in macro-instructions that generate two or more machine
instructions. For instance, with some Z80 assemblers the instruction ld hl,bc is recognized to
generate ld l,c followed by ld h,b.[27] These are sometimes known as pseudo-opcodes.

Mnemonics are arbitrary symbols; in 1985 the IEEE published Standard 694 for a uniform set of
mnemonics to be used by all assemblers. The standard has since been withdrawn.

Data directives
There are instructions used to define data elements to hold data and variables. They define the type of
data, the length and the alignment of data. These instructions can also define whether the data is available
to outside programs (programs assembled separately) or only to the program in which the data section is
defined. Some assemblers classify these as pseudo-ops.

Assembly directives
Assembly directives, also called pseudo-opcodes, pseudo-operations or pseudo-ops, are commands given
to an assembler "directing it to perform operations other than assembling instructions".[20] Directives
affect how the assembler operates and "may affect the object code, the symbol table, the listing file, and
the values of internal assembler parameters". Sometimes the term pseudo-opcode is reserved for
directives that generate object code, such as those that generate data.[28]

The names of pseudo-ops often start with a dot to distinguish them from machine instructions. Pseudo-
ops can make the assembly of the program dependent on parameters input by a programmer, so that one
program can be assembled in different ways, perhaps for different applications. Or, a pseudo-op can be
used to manipulate presentation of a program to make it easier to read and maintain. Another common use
of pseudo-ops is to reserve storage areas for run-time data and optionally initialize their contents to
known values.

Symbolic assemblers let programmers associate arbitrary names (labels or symbols) with memory
locations and various constants. Usually, every constant and variable is given a name so instructions can
reference those locations by name, thus promoting self-documenting code. In executable code, the name
of each subroutine is associated with its entry point, so any calls to a subroutine can use its name. Inside
subroutines, GOTO destinations are given labels. Some assemblers support local symbols which are often
lexically distinct from normal symbols (e.g., the use of "10$" as a GOTO destination).

Some assemblers, such as NASM, provide flexible symbol management, letting programmers manage
different namespaces, automatically calculate offsets within data structures, and assign labels that refer to
literal values or the result of simple computations performed by the assembler. Labels can also be used to
initialize constants and variables with relocatable addresses.

Assembly languages, like most other computer languages, allow comments to be added to program
source code that will be ignored during assembly. Judicious commenting is essential in assembly
language programs, as the meaning and purpose of a sequence of binary machine instructions can be
difficult to determine. The "raw" (uncommented) assembly language generated by compilers or
disassemblers is quite difficult to read when changes must be made.

Macros
Many assemblers support predefined macros, and others support programmer-defined (and repeatedly re-
definable) macros involving sequences of text lines in which variables and constants are embedded. The
macro definition is most commonly[nb 5] a mixture of assembler statements, e.g., directives, symbolic
machine instructions, and templates for assembler statements. This sequence of text lines may include
opcodes or directives. Once a macro has been defined its name may be used in place of a mnemonic.
When the assembler processes such a statement, it replaces the statement with the text lines associated
with that macro, then processes them as if they existed in the source code file (including, in some
assemblers, expansion of any macros existing in the replacement text). Macros in this sense date to IBM
autocoders of the 1950s.[29]

Macro assemblers typically have directives to, e.g., define macros, define variables, set variables to the
result of an arithmetic, logical or string expression, iterate, conditionally generate code. Some of those
directives may be restricted to use within a macro definition, e.g., MEXIT in HLASM, while others may
be permitted within open code (outside macro definitions), e.g., AIF and COPY in HLASM.

In assembly language, the term "macro" represents a more comprehensive concept than it does in some
other contexts, such as the pre-processor in the C programming language, where its #define directive
typically is used to create short single line macros. Assembler macro instructions, like macros in PL/I and
some other languages, can be lengthy "programs" by themselves, executed by interpretation by the
assembler during assembly.

Since macros can have 'short' names but expand to several or indeed many lines of code, they can be used
to make assembly language programs appear to be far shorter, requiring fewer lines of source code, as
with higher level languages. They can also be used to add higher levels of structure to assembly
programs, optionally introduce embedded debugging code via parameters and other similar features.

Macro assemblers often allow macros to take parameters. Some assemblers include quite sophisticated
macro languages, incorporating such high-level language elements as optional parameters, symbolic
variables, conditionals, string manipulation, and arithmetic operations, all usable during the execution of
a given macro, and allowing macros to save context or exchange information. Thus a macro might
generate numerous assembly language instructions or data definitions, based on the macro arguments.
This could be used to generate record-style data structures or "unrolled" loops, for example, or could
generate entire algorithms based on complex parameters. For instance, a "sort" macro could accept the
specification of a complex sort key and generate code crafted for that specific key, not needing the run-
time tests that would be required for a general procedure interpreting the specification. An organization
using assembly language that has been heavily extended using such a macro suite can be considered to be
working in a higher-level language since such programmers are not working with a computer's lowest-
level conceptual elements. Underlining this point, macros were used to implement an early virtual
machine in SNOBOL4 (1967), which was written in the SNOBOL Implementation Language (SIL), an
assembly language for a virtual machine. The target machine would translate this to its native code using
a macro assembler.[30] This allowed a high degree of portability for the time.

Macros were used to customize large scale software systems for specific customers in the mainframe era
and were also used by customer personnel to satisfy their employers' needs by making specific versions
of manufacturer operating systems. This was done, for example, by systems programmers working with
IBM's Conversational Monitor System / Virtual Machine (VM/CMS) and with IBM's "real time
transaction processing" add-ons, Customer Information Control System CICS, and ACP/TPF, the
airline/financial system that began in the 1970s and still runs many large computer reservation systems
(CRS) and credit card systems today.

It is also possible to use solely the macro processing abilities of an assembler to generate code written in
completely different languages, for example, to generate a version of a program in COBOL using a pure
macro assembler program containing lines of COBOL code inside assembly time operators instructing the
assembler to generate arbitrary code. IBM OS/360 uses macros to perform system generation. The user
specifies options by coding a series of assembler macros. Assembling these macros generates a job stream
to build the system, including job control language and utility control statements.

This is because, as was realized in the 1960s, the concept of "macro processing" is independent of the
concept of "assembly", the former being in modern terms more word processing, text processing, than
generating object code. The concept of macro processing appeared, and appears, in the C programming
language, which supports "preprocessor instructions" to set variables, and make conditional tests on their
values. Unlike certain previous macro processors inside assemblers, the C preprocessor is not Turing-
complete because it lacks the ability to either loop or "go to", the latter allowing programs to loop.

Despite the power of macro processing, it fell into disuse in many high level languages (major exceptions
being C, C++ and PL/I) while remaining a perennial for assemblers.

Macro parameter substitution is strictly by name: at macro processing time, the value of a parameter is
textually substituted for its name. The most famous class of bugs resulting was the use of a parameter that
itself was an expression and not a simple name when the macro writer expected a name. In the macro:

foo: macro a
load a*b

the intention was that the caller would provide the name of a variable, and the "global" variable or
constant b would be used to multiply "a". If foo is called with the parameter a-c, the macro expansion of
load a-c*b occurs. To avoid any possible ambiguity, users of macro processors can parenthesize
formal parameters inside macro definitions, or callers can parenthesize the input parameters.[31]

Support for structured programming

Packages of macros have been written providing structured programming elements to encode execution
flow. The earliest example of this approach was in the Concept-14 macro set,[32] originally proposed by
Harlan Mills (March 1970), and implemented by Marvin Kessler at IBM's Federal Systems Division,
which provided IF/ELSE/ENDIF and similar control flow blocks for OS/360 assembler programs. This
was a way to reduce or eliminate the use of GOTO operations in assembly code, one of the main factors
causing spaghetti code in assembly language. This approach was widely accepted in the early 1980s (the
latter days of large-scale assembly language use). IBM's High Level Assembler Toolkit[33] includes such
a macro package.

Another design was A-Natural,[34] a "stream-oriented" assembler for 8080/Z80 processors from
Whitesmiths Ltd. (developers of the Unix-like Idris operating system, and what was reported to be the
first commercial C compiler). The language was classified as an assembler because it worked with raw
machine elements such as opcodes, registers, and memory references; but it incorporated an expression
syntax to indicate execution order. Parentheses and other special symbols, along with block-oriented
structured programming constructs, controlled the sequence of the generated instructions. A-natural was
built as the object language of a C compiler, rather than for hand-coding, but its logical syntax won some
fans.

There has been little apparent demand for more sophisticated assemblers since the decline of large-scale
assembly language development.[35] In spite of that, they are still being developed and applied in cases
where resource constraints or peculiarities in the target system's architecture prevent the effective use of
higher-level languages.[36]

Assemblers with a strong macro engine allow structured programming via macros, such as the switch
macro provided with the Masm32 package (this code is a complete program):

include \masm32\include\masm32rt.inc ; use the Masm32 library

.code
demomain:
REPEAT 20
switch rv(nrandom, 9) ; generate a number between 0 and 8
mov ecx, 7
case 0
print "case 0"
case ecx ; in contrast to most other programming languages,
print "case 7" ; the Masm32 switch allows "variable cases"
case 1 .. 3
.if eax==1
print "case 1"
.elseif eax==2
print "case 2"
.else
print "cases 1 to 3: other"
.endif
case 4, 6, 8
print "cases 4, 6 or 8"
default
mov ebx, 19 ; print 20 stars
.Repeat
print "*"
dec ebx
.Until Sign? ; loop until the sign flag is set
endsw
print chr$(13, 10)
ENDM
exit
end demomain

Use of assembly language

When the stored-program computer was introduced programs were written in machine code, and loaded
into the computer from punched paper tape or toggled directly into memory from console switches.
Kathleen Booth "is credited with inventing assembly language"[37][38] based on theoretical work she
began in 1947, while working on the ARC2 at Birkbeck, University of London following consultation by
Andrew Booth (later her husband) with mathematician John von Neumann and physicist Herman
Goldstine at the Institute for Advanced Study.[38][39]
In late 1948, the Electronic Delay Storage Automatic Calculator (EDSAC) had an assembler (named
"initial orders") integrated into its bootstrap program. It used one-letter mnemonics developed by David
Wheeler, who is credited by the IEEE Computer Society as the creator of the first "assembler".[20][40][41]
Reports on the EDSAC introduced the term "assembly" for the process of combining fields into an
instruction word.[42] SOAP (Symbolic Optimal Assembly Program) was an assembly language for the
IBM 650 computer written by Stan Poley in 1955.[43]

Assembly languages eliminated much of the error-prone, tedious, and time-consuming first-generation
programming needed with the earliest computers, freeing programmers from tedium such as
remembering numeric codes and calculating addresses. They were once widely used for all sorts of
programming. By the late 1950s their use had largely been supplanted by higher-level languages in the
search for improved programming productivity.[44] Today, assembly language is still used for direct
hardware manipulation, access to specialized processor instructions, or to address critical performance
issues.[45] Typical uses are device drivers, low-level embedded systems, and real-time systems (see
§ Current usage).

Numerous programs were written entirely in assembly language. The Burroughs MCP (1961) was the
first computer for which an operating system was not developed entirely in assembly language; it was
written in Executive Systems Problem Oriented Language (ESPOL), an Algol dialect. Many commercial
applications were written in assembly language as well, including a large amount of the IBM mainframe
software developed by large corporations. COBOL, FORTRAN and some PL/I eventually displaced
assembly language, although a number of large organizations retained assembly-language application
infrastructures well into the 1990s.

Assembly language was the primary development language for 8-bit home computers such as the Apple
II, Atari 8-bit computers, ZX Spectrum, and Commodore 64. Interpreted BASIC on these systems did not
offer maximum execution speed and full use of facilities to take full advantage of the available hardware.
Assembly language was the default choice for programming 8-bit consoles such as the Atari 2600 and
Nintendo Entertainment System.

Key software for IBM PC compatibles such as MS-DOS, Turbo Pascal, and the Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheet
was written in assembly language. As computer speed grew exponentially, assembly language became a
tool for speeding up parts of programs, such as the rendering of Doom, rather than a dominant
development language. In the 1990s, assembly language was used to maximise performance from
systems such as the Sega Saturn,[46] and as the primary language for arcade hardware using the
TMS34010 integrated CPU/GPU such as Mortal Kombat and NBA Jam.

Current usage
There has been debate over the usefulness and performance of assembly language relative to high-level
languages.[47]

Although assembly language has specific niche uses where it is important (see below), there are other
tools for optimization.[48]

As of July 2017, the TIOBE index of programming language popularity ranks assembly language at 11,
ahead of Visual Basic, for example.[49] Assembler can be used to optimize for speed or optimize for size.
In the case of speed optimization, modern optimizing compilers are claimed[50] to render high-level
languages into code that can run as fast as hand-written assembly, despite some counter-
examples.[51][52][53] The complexity of modern processors and memory sub-systems makes effective
optimization increasingly difficult for compilers and assembly programmers alike.[54][55] Increasing
processor performance has meant that most CPUs sit idle most of the time,[56] with delays caused by
predictable bottlenecks such as cache misses, I/O operations and paging, making raw code execution
speed a non-issue for many programmers.

There are still certain computer programming domains in which the use of assembly programming is
more common:

Writing code for systems with older processors that have limited high-level language
options such as the Atari 2600, Commodore 64, and graphing calculators.[57] Programs for
these computers of the 1970s and 1980s are often written in the context of demoscene or
retrogaming subcultures.
Code that must interact directly with the hardware, for example in device drivers and
interrupt handlers.
In an embedded processor or DSP, high-repetition interrupts require the shortest number of
cycles per interrupt, such as an interrupt that occurs 1000 or 10000 times a second.
Programs that need to use processor-specific instructions not implemented in a compiler. A
common example is the bitwise rotation instruction at the core of many encryption
algorithms, as well as querying the parity of a byte or the 4-bit carry of an addition.
Stand-alone executables that are required to execute without recourse to the run-time
components or libraries associated with a high-level language, such as the firmware for
telephones, automobile fuel and ignition systems, air-conditioning control systems,and
security systems.
Programs with performance-sensitive inner loops, where assembly language provides
optimization opportunities that are difficult to achieve in a high-level language. For example,
linear algebra with BLAS[51][58] or discrete cosine transformation (e.g. SIMD assembly
version from x264[59]).
Programs that create vectorized functions for programs in higher-level languages such as C.
In the higher-level language this is sometimes aided by compiler intrinsic functions which
map directly to SIMD mnemonics, but nevertheless result in a one-to-one assembly
conversion specific for the given vector processor.
Real-time programs such as simulations, flight navigation systems, and medical equipment.
For example, in a fly-by-wire system, telemetry must be interpreted and acted upon within
strict time constraints. Such systems must eliminate sources of unpredictable delays, which
may be created by interpreted languages, automatic garbage collection, paging operations,
or preemptive multitasking. Choosing assembly or lower-level languages for such systems
gives programmers greater visibility and control over processing details.
Cryptographic algorithms that must always take strictly the same time to execute, preventing
timing attacks.
Video encoders and decoders such as rav1e (an encoder for AV1)[60] and dav1d (the
reference decoder for AV1)[61] contain assembly to leverage AVX2 and ARM Neon
instructions when available.
Modify and extend legacy code written for IBM mainframe computers.[62][63]
Situations where complete control over the environment is required, in extremely high-
security situations where nothing can be taken for granted.
Computer viruses, bootloaders, certain device drivers, or other items very close to the
hardware or low-level operating system.
 Instruction set simulators for monitoring, tracing and debugging where additional overhead
is kept to a minimum.
Situations where no high-level language exists, on a new or specialized processor for which
no cross compiler is available.
Reverse engineering and modifying program files such as:
existing binaries that may or may not have originally been written in a high-level
language, for example when trying to recreate programs for which source code is not
available or has been lost, or cracking copy protection of proprietary software.
Video games (also termed ROM hacking), which is possible via several methods. The
most widely employed method is altering program code at the assembly language level.
Assembly language is still taught in most computer science and electronic engineering programs.
Although few programmers today regularly work with assembly language as a tool, the underlying
concepts remain important. Such fundamental topics as binary arithmetic, memory allocation, stack
processing, character set encoding, interrupt processing, and compiler design would be hard to study in
detail without a grasp of how a computer operates at the hardware level. Since a computer's behaviour is
fundamentally defined by its instruction set, the logical way to learn such concepts is to study an
assembly language. Most modern computers have similar instruction sets. Therefore, studying a single
assembly language is sufficient to learn the basic concepts, recognize situations where the use of
assembly language might be appropriate, and to see how efficient executable code can be created from
high-level languages.[23]

Typical applications
Assembly language is typically used in a system's boot code, the low-level code that
initializes and tests the system hardware prior to booting the operating system and is often
stored in ROM. (BIOS on IBM-compatible PC systems and CP/M is an example.)
Assembly language is often used for low-level code, for instance for operating system
kernels, which cannot rely on the availability of pre-existing system calls and must indeed
implement them for the particular processor architecture on which the system will be
running.
Some compilers translate high-level languages into assembly first before fully compiling,
allowing the assembly code to be viewed for debugging and optimization purposes.
Some compilers for relatively low-level languages, such as Pascal or C, allow the
programmer to embed assembly language directly in the source code (so called inline
assembly). Programs using such facilities can then construct abstractions using different
assembly language on each hardware platform. The system's portable code can then use
these processor-specific components through a uniform interface.
Assembly language is useful in reverse engineering. Many programs are distributed only in
machine code form which is straightforward to translate into assembly language by a
disassembler, but more difficult to translate into a higher-level language through a
decompiler. Tools such as the Interactive Disassembler make extensive use of disassembly
for such a purpose. This technique is used by hackers to crack commercial software, and
competitors to produce software with similar results from competing companies.
Assembly language is used to enhance speed of execution, especially in early personal
computers with limited processing power and RAM.
 Assemblers can be used to generate blocks of data, with no high-level language overhead,
from formatted and commented source code, to be used by other code.[64][65]

See also
Computer
programming portal

Compiler
Comparison of assemblers
Disassembler
Hexadecimal
Instruction set architecture
Little man computer – an educational computer model with a base-10 assembly language
Nibble
Typed assembly language

Notes
1. Other than meta-assemblers
2. However, that does not mean that the assembler programs implementing those languages
are universal.
3. This is one of two redundant forms of this instruction that operate identically. The 8086 and
several other CPUs from the late 1970s/early 1980s have redundancies in their instruction
sets, because it was simpler for engineers to design these CPUs (to fit on silicon chips of
limited sizes) with the redundant codes than to eliminate them (see don't-care terms). Each
assembler will typically generate only one of two or more redundant instruction encodings,
but a disassembler will usually recognize any of them.
4. AMD manufactured second-source Intel 8086, 8088, and 80286 CPUs, and perhaps 8080A
and 8085A CPUs, under license from Intel, but starting with the 80386, Intel refused to
share their x86 CPU designs with anyone—AMD sued about this for breach of contract—
and AMD designed, made, and sold 32-bit and 64-bit x86-family CPUs without Intel's help or
endorsement.
5. In 7070 Autocoder, a macro definition is a 7070 macro generator program that the
assembler calls; Autocoder provides special macros for macro generators to use.

References
1. "Assembler language" (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.i
bm.zos.v2r1.asma400/asmr102112.htm). High Level Assembler for z/OS & z/VM & z/VSE
Language Reference Version 1 Release 6 (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/e
n/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.asma400/toc.htm). IBM. 2014 [1990]. SC26-4940-06.
2. "Assembly: Review" (http://web.cse.ohio-state.edu/~sivilotti.1/teaching/3903.recent/lectures/
lecture14.pdf) (PDF). Computer Science and Engineering. College of Engineering, Ohio
State University. 2016. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324153925/http://web.c
se.ohio-state.edu/~sivilotti.1/teaching/3903.recent/lectures/lecture14.pdf) (PDF) from the
original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2020-03-24.
 3. Archer, Benjamin (November 2016). Assembly Language For Students (https://dl.acm.org/ci
tation.cfm?id=3125846). North Charleston, South Carolina, US: CreateSpace Independent
Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5403-7071-6. "Assembly language may also be called symbolic
machine code."
4. Streib, James T. (2020). "Guide to Assembly Language". Undergraduate Topics in Computer
Science. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-35639-2 (https://d
oi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-030-35639-2). ISBN 978-3-030-35638-5. ISSN 1863-7310 (https://
search.worldcat.org/issn/1863-7310). S2CID 195930813 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Co
rpusID:195930813). "Programming in assembly language has the same benefits as
programming in machine language, except it is easier."
5. Saxon, James A.; Plette, William S. (1962). Programming the IBM 1401, a self-instructional
programmed manual (https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000480718;view=2up;
seq=6). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, US: Prentice-Hall. LCCN 62-20615 (https://lccn.loc.g
ov/62-20615). (NB. Use of the term assembly program.)
6. Kornelis, A. F. (2010) [2003]. "High Level Assembler – Opcodes overview, Assembler
Directives" (http://www.bixoft.nl/english/opcd00.htm). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/
20200324151326/http://www.bixoft.nl/english/opcd00.htm) from the original on 2020-03-24.
Retrieved 2020-03-24.
7. "Macro instructions" (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/co
m.ibm.zos.v2r1.asma400/asmr102115.htm). High Level Assembler for z/OS & z/VM &
z/VSE Language Reference Version 1 Release 6 (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgec
enter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.asma400/toc.htm). IBM. 2014 [1990]. SC26-
4940-06.
8. Booth, Andrew D; Britten, Kathleen HV (1947). Coding for A.R.C. (https://albert.ias.edu/bitstr
eam/handle/20.500.12111/7941/Booth_Britten_Coding_for_ARC_1947.pdf?sequence=1&is
Allowed=y) (PDF). Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton. Retrieved 2022-11-04.
9. Wilkes, Maurice Vincent; Wheeler, David John; Gill, Stanley J. (1951). The preparation of
programs for an electronic digital computer (Reprint 1982 ed.). Tomash Publishers.
ISBN 978-0-93822803-5. OCLC 313593586 (https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/313593586).
10. Fairhead, Harry (2017-11-16). "History of Computer Languages - The Classical Decade,
1950s" (https://web.archive.org/web/20200102192823/https://www.i-programmer.info/histor
y/57-computer-languages/471-the-classical-decade.html). I Programmer. Archived from the
original (https://www.i-programmer.info/history/57-computer-languages/471-the-classical-de
cade.html) on 2020-01-02. Retrieved 2020-03-06.
11. "How do assembly languages depend on operating systems?" (https://stackoverflow.com/qu
estions/6859348/how-do-assembly-languages-depend-on-operating-systems). Stack
Exchange. Stack Exchange Inc. 2011-07-28. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202003
24152747/https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6859348/how-do-assembly-languages-depen
d-on-operating-systems) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2020-03-24. (NB.
System calls often vary, e.g. for MVS vs. VSE vs. VM/CMS; the binary/executable formats
for different operating systems may also vary.)
12. Austerlitz, Howard (2003). "Computer Programming Languages". Data Acquisition
Techniques Using PCs. Elsevier. pp. 326–360. doi:10.1016/b978-012068377-2/50013-9 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1016%2Fb978-012068377-2%2F50013-9). ISBN 9780120683772.
"Assembly language (or Assembler) is a compiled, low-level computer language. It is
processor-dependent since it basically translates the Assembler's mnemonics directly into
the commands a particular CPU understands, on a one-to-one basis. These Assembler
mnemonics are the instruction set for that processor."
13. Carnes, Beau (2022-04-27). "Learn Assembly Language Programming with ARM" (https://w
ww.freecodecamp.org/news/learn-assembly-language-programming-with-arm/).
freeCodeCamp.org. Retrieved 2022-06-21. "Assembly language is often specific to a
particular computer architecture so there are multiple types of assembly languages. ARM is
an increasingly popular assembly language."
14. Brooks, Frederick P. (1986). "No Silver Bullet—Essence and Accident in Software
Engineering". Proceedings of the IFIP Tenth World Computing Conference. pp. 1069–1076.
15. Anguiano, Ricardo. "linux kernel mainline 4.9 sloccount.txt" (https://gist.github.com/ricardoa
nguiano/18125b7eb3f26cf83724fb60662bdd2c). Gist. Retrieved 2022-05-04.
16. Daintith, John, ed. (2019). "meta-assembler" (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O11-meta
assembler.html). A Dictionary of Computing. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2020032
4154503/https://www.encyclopedia.com/computing/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-pr
ess-releases/meta-assembler) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2020-03-24.
17. Xerox Data Systems (Oct 1975). Xerox Meta-Symbol Sigma 5-9 Computers Language and
Operations Reference Manual (http://bitsavers.org/pdf/sds/sigma/lang/900952G_metaSymb
olLangRef_Oct75.pdf) (PDF). p. vi. Archived (https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/htt
p://bitsavers.org/pdf/sds/sigma/lang/900952G_metaSymbolLangRef_Oct75.pdf) (PDF) from
the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 2020-06-07. "Used as a meta-assembler, it enables
the user to design his own programming languages and to generate processors for such
languages with a minimum of effort."
18. Sperry Univac Computer Systems (1977). Sperry Univac Computer Systems Meta-
Assembler (MASM) Programmer Reference (http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/1100/asm/
UP-8453_MASM_Programmers_Ref_1977.pdf) (PDF). Archived (https://ghostarchive.org/ar
chive/20221009/http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/1100/asm/UP-8453_MASM_Programm
ers_Ref_1977.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 2020-06-07.
19. "How to Use Inline Assembly Language in C Code" (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Usin
g-Assembly-Language-with-C.html). gnu.org. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
20. Salomon, David (February 1993) [1992]. Written at California State University, Northridge,
California, US. Chivers, Ian D. (ed.). Assemblers and Loaders (http://www.davidsalomon.na
me/assem.advertis/asl.pdf) (PDF). Ellis Horwood Series In Computers And Their
Applications (1 ed.). Chicester, West Sussex, UK: Ellis Horwood Limited / Simon & Schuster
International Group. pp. 7, 237–238. ISBN 0-13-052564-2. Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20200323010358/http://www.davidsalomon.name/assem.advertis/asl.pdf) (PDF) from
the original on 2020-03-23. Retrieved 2008-10-01. (xiv+294+4 pages)
21. Finlayson, Ian; Davis, Brandon; Gavin, Peter; Uh, Gang-Ryung; Whalley, David; Själander,
Magnus; Tyson, Gary (2013). "Improving processor efficiency by statically pipelining
instructions" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262389375). Proceedings of the 14th
ACM SIGPLAN/SIGBED conference on Languages, compilers and tools for embedded
systems. pp. 33–44. doi:10.1145/2465554.2465559 (https://doi.org/10.1145%2F2465554.24
65559). ISBN 9781450320856. S2CID 8015812 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8
015812).
22. Beck, Leland L. (1996). "2". System Software: An Introduction to Systems Programming.
Addison Wesley.
23. Hyde, Randall (September 2003) [1996-09-30]. "Foreword ("Why would anyone learn this
stuff?") / Chapter 12 – Classes and Objects". The Art of Assembly Language (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20100506233612/http://www.nostarch.com/frameset.php?startat=assembly)
(2 ed.). No Starch Press. ISBN 1-886411-97-2. Archived from the original (http://www.nostar
ch.com:80/frameset.php?startat=assembly) on 2010-05-06. Retrieved 2020-06-22. Errata:
[1] (https://web.archive.org/web/20200323150730/http://www.plantation-productions.com/W
ebster/www.artofasm.com/AoAErrata.html) (928 pages) [2] (https://web.archive.org/web/202
00323151406/http://www.plantation-productions.com/Webster/www.artofasm.com/index.htm
l)[3] (https://web.archive.org/web/20090720021936/http://www.arl.wustl.edu/~lockwood/clas
s/cs306/books/artofasm/toc.html)
24. Intel Architecture Software Developer's Manual, Volume 2: Instruction Set Reference (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20090611193346/http://download.intel.com/design/PentiumII/manu
als/24319102.PDF) (PDF). Vol. 2. Intel Corporation. 1999. Archived from the original (http://
download.intel.com/design/PentiumII/manuals/24319102.PDF) (PDF) on 2009-06-11.
Retrieved 2010-11-18.
25. Ferrari, Adam; Batson, Alan; Lack, Mike; Jones, Anita (2018-11-19) [Spring 2006]. Evans,
David (ed.). "x86 Assembly Guide" (http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs216/guides/x86.htm
l). Computer Science CS216: Program and Data Representation. University of Virginia.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324154938/http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/c
s216/guides/x86.html) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2010-11-18.
26. "The SPARC Architecture Manual, Version 8" (https://web.archive.org/web/2011121020141
0/http://www.sparc.com/standards/V8.pdf) (PDF). SPARC International. 1992. Archived from
the original (http://www.sparc.com/standards/V8.pdf) (PDF) on 2011-12-10. Retrieved
2011-12-10.
27. Moxham, James (1996). "ZINT Z80 Interpreter" (http://www.z80.de/z80/z80code.htm). Z80
Op Codes for ZINT. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324155515/http://www.z80.
de/z80/z80code.htm) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2013-07-21.
28. Hyde, Randall. "Chapter 8. MASM: Directives & Pseudo-Opcodes" (http://flint.cs.yale.edu/cs
422/doc/art-of-asm/pdf/CH08.PDF) (PDF). The Art of Computer Programming. Archived (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/20200324155843/https://www.cs.yale.edu/flint/cs422/doc/art-of-as
m/pdf/CH08.PDF) (PDF) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2011-03-19.
29. 1401 Autocoder System, Program #1401-AU-037, Version 3, Modification Level 11 (http://va
ndyke.mynetgear.com/1401/progs/autocoder/mod.11.pdf) (PDF). 1965-12-07. Retrieved
2024-01-21. "The following minor restriction or limitation is in effect with regard to the use of
1401 Autocoder when coding macro instructions ..."
30. Griswold, Ralph E. (1972). "Chapter 1". The Macro Implementation of SNOBOL4. San
Francisco, California, US: W. H. Freeman and Company. ISBN 0-7167-0447-1.
31. "Macros (C/C++), MSDN Library for Visual Studio 2008" (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/lib
rary/503x3e3s%28v=VS.90%29.aspx). Microsoft Corp. 2012-11-16. Archived (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20200324160251/https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/visualst
udio/visual-studio-2008/503x3e3s(v=vs.90)?redirectedfrom=MSDN) from the original on
2020-03-24. Retrieved 2010-06-22.
32. Kessler, Marvin M. (1970-12-18). "*Concept* Report 14 - Implementation of Macros To
Permit Structured Programming in OS/360" (http://skycoast.us/pscott/software/mvs/concept
14.html). MVS Software: Concept 14 Macros. Gaithersburg, Maryland, US: International
Business Machines Corporation. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324160528/htt
p://skycoast.us/pscott/software/mvs/concept14.html) from the original on 2020-03-24.
Retrieved 2009-05-25.
33. "High Level Assembler Toolkit Feature Increases Programmer Productivity" (https://web.arch
ive.org/web/20230307045942/https://www.ibm.com/common/ssi/ShowDoc.wss?docURL=/c
ommon/ssi/rep_ca/2/649/ENUSA95-1432/index.html&request_locale=en). Announcement
Letters. IBM. 1995-12-12. A95-1432. Archived from the original (https://www.ibm.com/comm
on/ssi/ShowDoc.wss?docURL=/common/ssi/rep_ca/2/649/ENUSA95-1432/index.html&requ
est_locale=en) on 2023-03-07.
34. Whitesmiths Ltd (1980-07-15). A-Natural Language Reference Manual (http://archive.org/de
tails/a-natural-manual).
35. "assembly language: Definition and Much More from Answers.com" (https://web.archive.org/
web/20090608215406/http://www.answers.com/topic/assembly-language?cat=technology).
answers.com. Archived from the original (http://www.answers.com/topic/assembly-languag
e?cat=technology) on 2009-06-08. Retrieved 2008-06-19.
36. Provinciano, Brian (2005-04-17). "NESHLA: The High Level, Open Source, 6502 Assembler
for the Nintendo Entertainment System" (http://neshla.sourceforge.net/). Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20200324161216/http://neshla.sourceforge.net/) from the original on
2020-03-24. Retrieved 2020-03-24.
37. Dufresne, Steven (2018-08-21). "Kathleen Booth: Assembling Early Computers While
Inventing Assembly" (https://hackaday.com/2018/08/21/kathleen-booth-assembling-early-co
mputers-while-inventing-assembly). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2020032415053
7/https://hackaday.com/2018/08/21/kathleen-booth-assembling-early-computers-while-inven
ting-assembly/) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2019-02-10.
38. Booth, Andrew Donald; Britten, Kathleen Hylda Valerie (September 1947) [August 1947].
General considerations in the design of an all purpose electronic digital computer (http://mt-
archive.info/Booth-1947.pdf) (PDF) (2 ed.). The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton,
New Jersey, US: Birkbeck College, London. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2020032
4161441/http://mt-archive.info/Booth-1947.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2020-03-24.
Retrieved 2019-02-10. "The non-original ideas, contained in the following text, have been
derived from a number of sources, ... It is felt, however, that acknowledgement should be
made to Prof. John von Neumann and to Dr. Herman Goldstein for many fruitful discussions
..."
39. Campbell-Kelly, Martin (April 1982). "The Development of Computer Programming in Britain
(1945 to 1955)". IEEE Annals of the History of Computing. 4 (2): 121–139.
doi:10.1109/MAHC.1982.10016 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FMAHC.1982.10016).
S2CID 14861159 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14861159).
40. Campbell-Kelly, Martin (1980). "Programming the EDSAC: Early Programming Activity at the
University of Cambridge". IEEE Annals of the History of Computing. 2 (1): 7–36.
doi:10.1109/MAHC.1980.10009 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FMAHC.1980.10009).
41. "1985 Computer Pioneer Award 'For assembly language programming' David Wheeler" (http
s://www.computer.org/web/awards/pioneer-david-wheeler). 2018-03-27.
42. Wilkes, Maurice Vincent (1949). "The EDSAC – an Electronic Calculating Machine". Journal
of Scientific Instruments. 26 (12): 385–391. Bibcode:1949JScI...26..385W (https://ui.adsabs.
harvard.edu/abs/1949JScI...26..385W). doi:10.1088/0950-7671/26/12/301 (https://doi.org/1
0.1088%2F0950-7671%2F26%2F12%2F301).
43. da Cruz, Frank (2019-05-17). "The IBM 650 Magnetic Drum Calculator" (http://www.columbi
a.edu/cu/computinghistory/650.html). Computing History - A Chronology of Computing.
Columbia University. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200215063114/http://www.col
umbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/index.html) from the original on 2020-02-15. Retrieved
2012-01-17.
44. Abell, John C. "Oct. 15, 1956: Fortran Forever Changes Computing's Fortunes" (https://ww
w.wired.com/2009/10/1015fortran-launch/). Wired. ISSN 1059-1028 (https://search.worldcat.
org/issn/1059-1028). Retrieved 2024-03-02.
45. Collen, Morris F. (March–April 1994). "The Origins of Informatics" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/pmc/articles/PMC116189). Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 1
(2): 96–97. doi:10.1136/jamia.1994.95236152 (https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fjamia.1994.95236
152). PMC 116189 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC116189). PMID 7719803
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7719803).
46. Pettus, Sam (2008-01-10). "SegaBase Volume 6 - Saturn" (https://web.archive.org/web/200
80713074116/http://www.eidolons-inn.net/tiki-index.php?page=SegaBase+Saturn). Archived
from the original on 2008-07-13. Retrieved 2008-07-25.
47. Kauler, Barry (1997-01-09). Windows Assembly Language and Systems Programming: 16-
and 32-Bit Low-Level Programming for the PC and Windows (https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=E0dZDwAAQBAJ). CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-48227572-8. Retrieved 2020-03-24.
"Always the debate rages about the applicability of assembly language in our modern
programming world."
48. Hsieh, Paul (2020-03-24) [2016, 1996]. "Programming Optimization" (http://www.azillionmon
keys.com/qed/optimize.html). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324163624/http://
www.azillionmonkeys.com/qed/optimize.html) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved
2020-03-24. "... design changes tend to affect performance more than ... one should not
skip straight to assembly language until ..."
49. "TIOBE Index" (http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe_index). TIOBE Software. Archived (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20200324163848/https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/) from the original on
2020-03-24. Retrieved 2020-03-24.
50. Rusling, David A. (1999) [1996]. "Chapter 2 Software Basics" (http://tldp.org/LDP/tlk/basics/s
w.html). The Linux Kernel. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324164120/http://tld
p.org/LDP/tlk/basics/sw.html) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2012-03-11.
51. Markoff, John Gregory (2005-11-28). "Writing the Fastest Code, by Hand, for Fun: A Human
Computer Keeps Speeding Up Chips" (https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/technology/28s
uper.html?_r=1). The New York Times. Seattle, Washington, US. Archived (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20200323163333/https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/technology/writing-the-fa
stest-code-by-hand-for-fun-a-human-computer-keeps.html) from the original on 2020-03-23.
Retrieved 2010-03-04.
52. "Bit-field-badness" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100205120952/http://hardwarebug.org/20
10/01/30/bit-field-badness/). hardwarebug.org. 2010-01-30. Archived from the original (htt
p://hardwarebug.org/2010/01/30/bit-field-badness/) on 2010-02-05. Retrieved 2010-03-04.
53. "GCC makes a mess" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100316212040/http://hardwarebug.or
g/2009/05/13/gcc-makes-a-mess/). hardwarebug.org. 2009-05-13. Archived from the original
(http://hardwarebug.org/2009/05/13/gcc-makes-a-mess/) on 2010-03-16. Retrieved
2010-03-04.
54. Hyde, Randall. "The Great Debate" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080616110102/http://we
bster.cs.ucr.edu/Page_TechDocs/GreatDebate/debate1.html). Archived from the original (htt
p://webster.cs.ucr.edu/Page_TechDocs/GreatDebate/debate1.html) on 2008-06-16.
Retrieved 2008-07-03.
55. "Code sourcery fails again" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100402221204/http://hardwareb
ug.org/2008/11/28/codesourcery-fails-again/). hardwarebug.org. 2010-01-30. Archived from
the original (http://hardwarebug.org/2008/11/28/codesourcery-fails-again/) on 2010-04-02.
Retrieved 2010-03-04.
56. Click, Cliff; Goetz, Brian. "A Crash Course in Modern Hardware" (http://www.infoq.com/prese
ntations/click-crash-course-modern-hardware). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200
324164402/https://www.infoq.com/presentations/click-crash-course-modern-hardware/) from
the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2014-05-01.
57. "68K Programming in Fargo II" (http://tifreakware.net/tutorials/89/a/calc/fargoii.htm).
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20080702181616/http://tifreakware.net/tutorials/89/a/
calc/fargoii.htm) from the original on 2008-07-02. Retrieved 2008-07-03.
58. "BLAS Benchmark-August2008" (http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Benchmark-Augu
st2008). eigen.tuxfamily.org. 2008-08-01. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202003241
64844/http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Benchmark-August2008) from the original
on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2010-03-04.
59. "x264.git/common/x86/dct-32.asm" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120304083653/http://git.
videolan.org/?p=x264.git%3Ba%3Dtree%3Bf%3Dcommon%2Fx86%3Bhb%3DHEAD).
git.videolan.org. 2010-09-29. Archived from the original (http://git.videolan.org/?p=x264.git;a
=tree;f=common/x86;hb=HEAD) on 2012-03-04. Retrieved 2010-09-29.
60. "rav1e/README.md at v0.6.3" (https://github.com/xiph/rav1e/blob/v0.6.3/README.md#feat
ures-1=). GitHub. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20230222005925/https://github.co
m/xiph/rav1e/blob/v0.6.3/README.md) from the original on 2023-02-22. Retrieved
2023-02-21.
61. "README.md · 1.1.0 · VideoLAN / dav1d" (https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/-/blob/
1.1.0/README.md). 2023-02-13. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20230222004317/ht
tps://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/-/blob/1.1.0/README.md) from the original on 2023-
02-22. Retrieved 2023-02-21.
62. Bosworth, Edward (2016). "Chapter 1 – Why Study Assembly Language" (http://www.edwar
dbosworth.com/My3121Textbook_HTM/MyText3121_Ch01_V01.htm).
www.edwardbosworth.com. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20200324154257/http://w
ww.edwardbosworth.com/My3121Textbook_HTM/MyText3121_Ch01_V01.htm) from the
original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved 2016-06-01.
63. "z/OS Version 2 Release 3 DFSMS Macro Instructions for Data Sets" (https://www-01.ibm.c
om/servers/resourcelink/svc00100.nsf/pages/zOSV2R3sc236852/$file/idad500_v2r3.pdf)
(PDF). IBM. 2019-02-15. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20210625140314/https://ww
w-01.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink/svc00100.nsf/pages/zOSV2R3sc236852/$file/idad500_v
2r3.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2021-06-25. Retrieved 2021-09-14.
64. Paul, Matthias R. (2001) [1996], "Specification and reference documentation for NECPINW"
(http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/print/cpi/NECPI208.ZIP),
NECPINW.CPI - DOS code page switching driver for NEC Pinwriters (2.08 ed.),
FILESPEC.TXT, NECPINW.ASM, EUROFONT.INC from NECPI208.ZIP, archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20170910202610/http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/uti
l/print/cpi/NECPI208.ZIP) from the original on 2017-09-10, retrieved 2013-04-22
65. Paul, Matthias R. (2002-05-13). "[fd-dev] mkeyb" (https://marc.info/?l=freedos-dev&m=1021
33580113139&w=2). freedos-dev. Archived (https://archive.today/20180910213410/https://
marc.info/?l=freedos-dev&m=102133580113139&w=2) from the original on 2018-09-10.
Retrieved 2018-09-10.

Further reading
Bartlett, Jonathan (2004). Programming from the Ground Up - An introduction to
programming using linux assembly language (http://programminggroundup.blogspot.com/).
Bartlett Publishing. ISBN 0-9752838-4-7. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2020032411
0645/http://programminggroundup.blogspot.com/) from the original on 2020-03-24.
Retrieved 2020-03-24. [4] (https://web.archive.org/web/20090206015549/http://download.sa
vannah.gnu.org/releases-noredirect/pgubook/ProgrammingGroundUp-1-0-booksize.pdf)
Britton, Robert (2003). MIPS Assembly Language Programming. Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-
142044-5.
Calingaert, Peter (1979) [1978-11-05]. Written at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Horowitz, Ellis (ed.). Assemblers, Compilers, and Program Translation (https://archive.org/d
etails/assemblerscompil00cali). Computer software engineering series (1st printing, 1st ed.).
Potomac, Maryland, US: Computer Science Press, Inc. ISBN 0-914894-23-4. ISSN 0888-
2088 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0888-2088). LCCN 78-21905 (https://lccn.loc.gov/78-
21905). Retrieved 2020-03-20. (2+xiv+270+6 pages)
Duntemann, Jeff (2000). Assembly Language Step-by-Step. Wiley. ISBN 0-471-37523-3.
Hyde, Randall (2010). The Art of Assembly Language (2nd ed.). No Starch Press.
ISBN 978-1593272074.
Jorgensen, Ed. "x86-64 Assembly Language Programming with Ubuntu" (http://www.egr.unl
v.edu/~ed/assembly64.pdf) (PDF).
Kann, Charles W. (2015). "Introduction to MIPS Assembly Language Programming" (http://c
upola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=oer). Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20200324110918/https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer
=&httpsredir=1&article=1001&context=oer) from the original on 2020-03-24. Retrieved
2020-03-24.
Kann, Charles W. (2021). "Introduction to Assembly Language Programming: From Soup to
Nuts: ARM Edition" (https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/oer/8/). Open Educational Resources.
Norton, Peter; Socha, John (1986). Peter Norton's Assembly Language Book for the IBM
PC. New York, US: Brady Books.
 Singer, Michael (1980). PDP-11. Assembler Language Programming and Machine
Organization. New York, US: John Wiley & Sons.
Sweetman, Dominic (1999). See MIPS Run. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. ISBN 1-55860-
410-3.
Waldron, John (1998). Introduction to RISC Assembly Language Programming. Addison
Wesley. ISBN 0-201-39828-1.
"ASM Community Book" (https://web.archive.org/web/20130530074022/http://www.asmcom
munity.net/book/). 2009. Archived from the original (http://www.asmcommunity.net/book/) on
2013-05-30. Retrieved 2013-05-30. ("An online book full of helpful ASM info, tutorials and
code examples" by the ASM Community, archived at the internet archive.)

External links
Assembly Language (http://wiki.c2.com/?AssemblyLanguage) and Learning Assembly
Language (http://wiki.c2.com/?LearningAssemblyLanguage) pages on WikiWikiWeb
Assembly Language Programming Examples (http://www.azillionmonkeys.com/qed/asmexa
mple.html)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assembly_language&oldid=1272778416"