Compare using a compiler with using an interpreter to translate high-level programming code

Low-level languages are referred to as 'low' because they are very close to how different hardware elements of a computer actually communicate with each other. Low-level languages are machine oriented and require extensive knowledge of computer hardware and its configuration. There are two categories of low-level languages: machine language and assembly language.

Machine language, or machine code, is the only language that is directly understood by the computer, and it does not need to be translated. All instructions use binary notation and are written as a string of 1s and 0s. A program instruction in machine language may look something like this:

Technically speaking, this is the only language computer hardware understands. However, binary notation is very difficult for humans to understand. This is where assembly languages come in.

An assembly language is the first step to improve programming structure and make machine language more readable by humans. An assembly language consists of a set of symbols and letters. A translator is required to translate the assembly language to machine language. This translator program is called the 'assembler.' It can be called the second generation language since it no longer uses 1s and 0s to write instructions, but terms like MOVE, ADD, SUB and END.

Many of the earliest computer programs were written in assembly languages. Most programmers today don't use assembly languages very often, but they are still used for applications like operating systems of electronic devices and technical applications, which use very precise timing or optimization of computer resources. While easier than machine code, assembly languages are still pretty difficult to understand. This is why high-level languages have been developed.

i think so.

by: nicholas