是指令集架构二进制（不可读）或人可读？ [英] Are Instruction set architecture binary (not readable) or human-readable?
问题描述
- 如果我是正确的，一个ISA是在一台机器指令集
语言。那么，在ISA 0/1二进制序列的说明？ -
为什么我看到在ISA指令是人类可读的文字
图书？
- If I am correct, an ISA is the set of instructions in a machine language. So are the instructions in an ISA 0/1 binary sequences?
Why did I see the instructions in an ISA are human-readable words in books?
是人类可读的词重新present的指示在
ISA中的相同的汇编语言中使用的助记符
ISA？
Are the human-readable words that represent the instructions in an ISA the same as the mnemonics used in the assembly language of the ISA?
是指令的人类可读的词语的ISA部分
在ISA？
Are the human-readable words of the instructions in an ISA part of the ISA?
如果是的话，有没有翻译的过程，从人的翻译
在ISA成机器语言可读指令，就像一个
汇编翻译汇编语言到机器语言？
If yes, is there a translation process that translate from the human readable instructions in an ISA to a machine language, just like an assembler translates an assembly language to a machine language?
感谢。
推荐答案
在书可读的文字被称为汇编语言是一个工具，称为汇编器将汇编语言转换为机器code这只是一和零意味着东西的逻辑。您还可以拆卸以机器code和汇编语言结束了。
the human readable words in books are called assembly language and yes a tool called an assembler converts the assembly language into machine code which is just ones and zeros that mean something to the logic. You can also disassemble taking the machine code and ending up with assembly language.
为特定的处理器指令集的集合或称为指令集或指令集架构或ISA。
The collection or set of instructions for a particular processor is called the instruction set or instruction set architecture or ISA.
本机code是最重要的，那就是在处理器上运行。人可读的汇编语言不一定有一个标准。该设计的处理器通常与机器code和汇编语言都创建了一个文件，通常他们创建或让别人创建匹配汇编语言汇编的公司。但是，这并不构成标准。任何人都可以创造任何汇编语言和汇编他们希望该体系结构，只要它产生机器code（以及如果他们希望它是有用的，但可能会创建随机的垃圾，有它崩溃，如果这是他们的目标）。
The machine code is what matters, that is what the processor operates on. the human readable assembly language does not necessarily have a standard. The company that designs the processor usually creates a document with both the machine code and an assembly language and usually they create or have someone create an assembler that matches that assembly language. But that does not constitute a standard. anyone can invent any assembly language and assembler they want for that architecture so long as it produces machine code (well if they want it to be useful, the could create random garbage and have it crash if that is their goal).
英特尔VS AT＆amp; T公司格式以及对不同汇编语言的相同的处理器系列闻名。但这样做的GNU汇编端口的人往往也乱了原有的汇编语言。大多的指令，汇编语言的非指令部分是可能变化从一个汇编到另一个部分。同样，你可以坐下来，让你自己和梦想你想，只要你的汇编和/或编译器的语法使工作机code为目标。
The intel vs at&t formats are well known for different assembly languages for the same processor family. but the folks that do the gnu assembler ports tend to also mess up the original assembly language. Mostly the directives, the non-instruction portions of the assembly language are the parts that might vary from one assembler to another. Again you could sit down and make your own, and dream up any syntax you want so long as your assembler and/or compiler makes working machine code for that target.
既然你真的有一个汇编程序开发和测试一个新的指令集......你有一个汇编程序......当移植编译器或语言，这并不笔者要发疯读取二进制机器code，他们可以只输出汇编语言，然后产卵汇编。这是做一个非常普遍的方式，但一些编译器直接进入机器code因各种原因。 JIT，或者只是因为我能。
Since you really have to have an assembler to develop and test a new instruction set...you have an assembler...When porting a compiler or language the author of that doesnt have to go crazy reading binary machine code, they can just output assembly language then spawn the assembler. This is an extremely common way to do it, but some compilers go straight to machine code for various reasons. JIT, or "just because I can".
这篇关于是指令集架构二进制（不可读）或人可读？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
