Hello. What would Binary be? Like would it be a programming language? Same with Hexadecimal, ASM, and other low level machine code languages.
What would Binary be considered as? |
Apr 11, 2011 03:43 PM
(This post was last modified: Apr 11, 2011 03:44 PM by Ethereal.)
Machine code, I should imagine. However, it's not really a language, just a numerical representation of data.
/thread μεγαλομανία
 (Apr 11, 2011 02:31 PM)((void (*)())NULL)() Wrote: Hello. What would Binary be? Like would it be a programming language? Same with Hexadecimal, ASM, and other low level machine code languages. It's a number system just like decimal (what we count in). Binary - Base 2 Octal - Base 8 Decimal - Base 10 Hexadecimal - Base 16 Just to name the more common number systems. <Disease />
(Apr 11, 2011 03:43 PM)Ethereal Wrote: Machine code, I should imagine. However, it's not really a language, just a numerical representation of data. Thanks. At least I got part of it right "low level machine code".
Apr 11, 2011 06:38 PM
(This post was last modified: Apr 11, 2011 06:41 PM by Zer0Fact0r.)
(Apr 11, 2011 05:57 PM)alfonzo1955 Wrote: Machine code is the lowest level, not assembly. Assembly is machine code. (Apr 11, 2011 06:38 PM)Zer0Fact0r Wrote: Assembly is machine code. That's what I thought lol. 😶 (Apr 11, 2011 06:38 PM)Zer0Fact0r Wrote: Assembly is machine code.This is wrong. Assembly gets assembeled into machinecode. Hex/binary is machonecode. You could write 1 assembly code and run it through 2 different assemblers and get 2 different binary-codes, dependent on the archtecture on the system it is supposed to run on. (Apr 11, 2011 07:43 PM)kashug Wrote: This is wrong. Assembly gets assembeled into machinecode. Hex/binary is machonecode. Then what is Assembly? You're correct according to this (Apr 11, 2011 07:47 PM)((void (*)())NULL)() Wrote: Then what is Assembly?I would say a language that directly describes the machine-code. Each assembly-instruction gets directly converted to 1 specific binarycode. The difference is basicallt that if you write the machine-instruction 1110 1111 1111 0000 1110 1111 1111 0000 = 0xEFF0EFF0 They directly relate to each-other and describe the same mathematical value. while the assembly instruction add t1, t2, t3 # t3 = t1+t2 Would become 2 different machinecodes depending on if you want it to run on an x86 processor, MIPS-prosessor or a RISC-processor.
Apr 11, 2011 07:56 PM
(This post was last modified: Apr 11, 2011 07:57 PM by TLF-KoBE.)
(Apr 11, 2011 05:57 PM)alfonzo1955 Wrote: Machine code is the lowest level, not assembly. (Apr 11, 2011 07:43 PM)kashug Wrote: You could write 1 assembly code and run it through 2 different assemblers and get 2 different binary-codes, dependent on the archtecture on the system it is supposed to run on. Both are correct. Assembly is assembled into to machine code, which is the lowest level. Machine code is machine specific so each different machine would have a different set of instructions depending on the different components. Edit: sorry my post was a bit late... (Apr 11, 2011 08:19 PM)((void (*)())NULL)() Wrote: How do you guys tell if it's high level or low level machine code? Sorry for being such a noob, I joined Hack Forums a couple of days ago.Huh? Machine-code is always lowlevel. Assembly is also a low-level language. Things like C is highlevel languages.
Actually it could be considered the same level as machinecode, since assembly in it's purest context is just the human readable representation of machinecode.
(Apr 11, 2011 07:55 PM)kashug Wrote: I would say a language that directly describes the machine-code. Each assembly-instruction gets directly converted to 1 specific binarycode. The difference is basicallt that if you write the machine-instruction What are you talking about? Assembly is specific to a certain architecture, so if you have assembly for PowerPC and tried assembling it for x86 you would just get errors. So the hexadecimal or binary can be converted to assembly and vice versa. |
|
|
