Guess the language

>C asm
At least you tried

>>56138122
I think he means that's the disassembly of a C program, and the one on the right is exactly the same but with s/main/_secret_lang_main/
Considering it still says "GCC" except a different version, I'm going to say C.

>>56138191
GCC has support for like 20 languages.

>call puts
>in both of them

Gonna go with C/C++;

>>56138088
Perl :^)

>>56138088
C++, obviously.

>>56138088
That's startup code anyways, it's the same no matter what language the program is written in as long as that language has a native compiler.

>>56138271
No it's not, kill yourself now.

File: 1362960884713.png (28KB, 499x322px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 499x322px

>>56138282
It's okay OP, I know you were trying to be clever and all but you just got BTFO.

>>56138282
wow, nice argument fagtron; you sure showed that guy

>>56138088
I read that as C autism

File: 1464885758653.jpg (109KB, 500x475px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x475px

>>56138289
>>56138314
I'm not OP, since I'm not that retarded.
But you're fucking stupid, that is not startup code. startup code is in crt*.o which contains _start (protip: main isn't the entry point, _start is) which gets linked into the executable at link time.
The outputted assembly does not contain any startup code, the earliest point in program execution time that is present in the output assembly is the setting up of the stack frame for the main function, which is just normal stack frame setup like any other function call.

I can't believe this is the current state of C programmers, absolutely unbelievable.
You can kill yourself now before you cause yourself any more embarrassment.

>>56138368
> implying I give a rat's ass about C
It's ok anon, I was pointing out that simply sputtering "kys" whet you do not agree with an anon will not further any points, and just because you become indistinguishable from any random 14 year old, and actually detracts from anyone actually believing your point.

>>56138420
Just admit you got BTFO and fuck off.

>>56138445
y-you too

>>56138088
Neither is C nor ASM, that is GCC intermediate level output. Generates this intermediate code to later apply optimizations. The only difference is the version of GCC and the naming of its operands.

>>56139230
You're a fucking idiot.

>>56138233
You can call c stdlib functions (I think) from any language that uses GCC. It just depends how convoluted it is.

What kind of retarded post is this ? There is no way to tell the difference. It's the same exact assembly for both left and right. the only difference is the label (LFB48 vs LFB1).

What do you expect ? Even the best assembly pro couldn't tell the difference.

>>56139476
Just look at the .ident label :^)

>>56139476
That's probably the point

I wasted 3 minutes on this thread/10