General

Unlike the other programming languages catalogued here, assembly language is not a single language, but rather a group of languages. Each processor family (and sometimes individual processors within a processor family) has its own assembly language.
In contrast to high level languages, data structures and program structures in assembly language are created by directly implementing them on the underlying hardware. So, instead of catalogueing the data structures and program structures that can be built (in assembly language you can build any structures you so desire, including new structures nobody else has ever created), we will compare and contrast the hardware capabilities of various processor families.
This web page does not attempt to teach how to program in assembly language. Because of the close relationship between assembly languages and the underlying hardware, this web page will discuss hardware implementation as well as software.
If you aren’t fairly familiar with how computers work, you should probably first read basics of computer hardware or this page won’t make any sense at all.

History

history: The oldest non-machine language, allowing for a more human readable method of writing programs than writing in binary bit patterns (or even hexadecimal patterns).Assembly languages were first developed in the 1950s, when they were referred to as second generation programming languages. They eliminated much of the error-prone and time-consuming first-generation programming needed with the earliest computers, freeing the programmer from tedium such as remembering numeric codes and calculating addresses. They were once widely used for all sorts of programming. However, by the 1980s (1990s on small computers), their use had largely been supplanted by high-level languages, in the search for improved programming productivity. Today, assembly language is used primarily for direct hardware manipulation, access to specialized processor instructions, or to address critical performance issues. Typical uses are device drivers, low-level embedded systems, and real-time systems.

Historically, a large number of programs have been written entirely in assembly language. Operating systems were almost exclusively written in assembly language until the widespread acceptance of C in the 1970s and early 1980s. Many commercial applications were written in assembly language as well, including a large amount of the IBM mainframe software written by large corporations. COBOL and FORTRAN eventually displaced much of this work, although a number of large organizations retained assembly-language application infrastructures well into the 90s.

Most early microcomputers relied on hand-coded assembly language, including most operating systems and large applications. This was because these systems had severe resource constraints, imposed idiosyncratic memory and display architectures, and provided limited, buggy system services. Perhaps more important was the lack of first-class high-level language compilers suitable for microcomputer use. A psychological factor may have also played a role: the first generation of microcomputer programmers retained a hobbyist, "wires and pliers" attitude.

In a more commercial context, the biggest reasons for using assembly language were minimal bloat (size), minimal overhead, greater speed, and reliability.

Typical examples of large assembly language programs from this time are the MS-DOS operating system, the early IBM PC spreadsheet program Lotus 1-2-3, and almost all popular games for the Atari 800 family of home computers. Even into the 1990s, most console video games were written in assembly, including most games for the Mega Drive/Genesis and the Super Nintendo Entertainment System[citation needed]. According to some industry insiders, the assembly language was the best computer language to use to get the best performance out of the Sega Saturn, a console that was notoriously challenging to develop and program games for . The popular arcade game NBA Jam (1993) is another example. On the Commodore 64, Amiga, Atari ST, as well as ZX Spectrum home computers, assembler has long been the primary development language. This was in large part due to the fact that BASIC dialects on these systems offered insufficient execution speed, as well as insufficient facilities to take full advantage of the available hardware on these systems. Some systems, most notably Amiga, even have IDEs with highly advanced debugging and macro facilities, such as the freeware ASM-One assembler, comparable to that of Microsoft Visual Studio facilities (ASM-One predates Microsoft Visual Studio).

The Assembler for the VIC-20 was written by Don French and published by French Silk. At 1639 bytes in length, its author believes it is the smallest symbolic assembler ever written. The assembler supported the usual symbolic addressing and the definition of character strings or hex strings. It also allowed address expressions which could be combined with addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, logical AND, logical OR, and exponentiation operators.

Comparison of assembly and high level languages

Assembly languages are close to a one to one correspondence between symbolic instructions and executable machine codes. Assembly languages also include directives to the assembler, directives to the linker, directives for organizing data space, and macros. Macros can be used to combine several assembly language instructions into a high level language-like construct (as well as other purposes). There are cases where a symbolic instruction is translated into more than one machine instruction. But in general, symbolic assembly language instructions correspond to individual executable machine instructions.
High level languages are abstract. Typically a single high level instruction is translated into several (sometimes dozens or in rare cases even hundreds) executable machine language instructions. Some early high level languages had a close correspondence between high level instructions and machine language instructions. For example, most of the early COBOL instructions translated into a very obvious and small set of machine instructions. The trend over time has been for high level languages to increease in abstraction. Modern object oriented programming languages are highly abstract (although, interestingly, some key object oriented programming constructs do translate into a very compact set of machine instructions).
Assembly language is much harder to program than high level languages. The programmer must pay attention to far more detail and must have an intimate knowledge of the processor in use. But high quality hand crafted assembly language programs can run much faster and use much less memory and other resources than a similar program written in a high level language. Speed increases of two to 20 times faster are fairly common, and increases of hundreds of times faster are occassionally possible. Assembly language programming also gives direct access to key machine features essential for implementing certain kinds of low level routines, such as an operating system kernel or microkernel, device drivers, and machine control.
High level programming languages are much easier for less skilled programmers to work in and for semi-technical managers to supervise. And high level languages allow faster development times than work in assembly language, even with highly skilled programmers. Development time increases of 10 to 100 times faster are fairly common. Programs written in high level languages (especially object oriented programming languages) are much easier and less expensive to maintain than similar programs written in assembly language (and for a successful software project, the vast majority of the work and expense is in maintenance, not initial development).
For information on how to interface high level languages and assembly languages, see assembly/high level language interface

Availability

availability: Assemblers are available for just about every processor ever made. Native assemblers produce object code on the same hardware that the object code will run on. Cross assemblers produce object code on different hardware that the object code will run on.

Structure

format: free form or column (depends on the assembly langauge)
nature: procedural language with one to one correspondence between language mnemonics and executable machine instructions.
“Assembler languages occupy a unique place in the computing world. Since most assmebler-language statements are symbolic of individual machine-language instructions, the assembler-language programmer has the full power of the computer at his disposal in a way that users of other languages do not. Because of the direct relationship between assembler language and machine language, assembler language is used when high efficiency of programs is needed, and especially in areas of application that are so new and amorphous that existing program-oriented languages are ill-suited for describing the procedures to be followed.”
“Perhaps the most glaring difference among the three types of languages [high level, assembly, and machine] is that as we move from high-level languages to lower levels, the code gets harder to read (with understanding). The major advantages of high-level languages are that they are easy to read and are machine independent. The instructions are written in a combination of English and ordinary mathematical notation, and programs can be run with minor, if any, changes on different computers.”
“The second most visible difference among the different types of languages is that several lines of assembly language are needed to encode one line of a high-level language program.”
“There are a number of situations in which it is very desirable to use assembler language routines to do part of a job, and use some higher-level language for other parts. It makes sense to use higher-level languages such as Fortran, COBOL, or PL/I for parts of procedures for which they are well-suited, and supplement with assembler language routines for those parts of procedures for which the higher-level language is awkward or inefficient.”
“If one has a choice between assembly language and a high-level language, why choose assembly language? The fact that the amount of programming done in assembly language is quite small compared to the amount done in high-level languages indicates that one generally doesn’t choose assembly language. However, there are situations where it may not be convenient, efficient, or possible to write programs in hihg-level languages. … Programs to control and communicate with peripheral devices (input and output devices) are usually written in assembly language because they use special instructions that are not available in high-level languages, and they must be very efficient. Some systems programs are written in assembly language for similar reasons. In general, since high-level languages are designed without the features of a particular machine in mind and a compiler must do its job in a standardized way to accomodate all valid programs, there are situations where to take advantage of special features of a machine, to program some details that are inaccessible from a high-level language, or perhaps to increase the efficiency of a program, one may reasonably choose to write in assembly language.”
“In situations where programming in a high-level language is not appropriate, it is clear that assembly language is to be preferred to machine language. Assembly language has a number of advantages over machine code aside from the obvious increase in readability. One is that the use of symbolic names for data and instruction labels frees the programmer from computing and recomputing the memory locations whenever a change is made in a program. Another is that assembly languages generally have a feature, called macros, that frees the [programmer] from having to repeat similar sections of code used in several places in a program. Assemblers fo many bookkeeping and other tasks for the user. Often compilers translate into assembly language rather than machine code.”

Kinds of processors

Processors can broadly be divided into the categories of: CISC, RISC, hybrid, and special purpose.
Complex Instruction Set Computers (CISC) have a large instruction set, with hardware support for a wide variety of operations. In scientific, engineering, and mathematical operations with hand coded assembly language (and some business applications with hand coded assembly language), CISC processors usually perform the most work in the shortest time.
Reduced Instruction Set Computers (RISC) have a small, compact instruction set. In most business applications and in programs created by compilers from high level language source, RISC processors usually perform the most work in the shortest time.
Hybrid processors are some combination of CISC and RISC approaches, attempting to balance the advantages of each approach.
Special purpose processors are optimized to perform specific functions. Digital signal processors and various kinds of co-processors are the most common kinds of special purpose processors.

This is a brief into power of assembly !