Talk:Assembly Language

Assembly Language
Why is the lowercase entry assembly language not sufficient for this? I doubt people use this term exclusively capitalized. -- Liliana • 22:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * If it's attested in this form (which I suspect), just convert it to an -entry. - -sche (discuss) 23:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This is not a specific language or brand (like, say, Visual C++), it is just assembly language. It's generic. Should not exist under capitals. Should be removed. I have years of experience in this arena which will no doubt be ignored. Please prove the existence of the capitalised version. Equinox ◑ 23:04, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Perhaps Assembly language (with "language" in lower case) would be more appropriate (in case Assembly has to be in all caps). Capitalising "language" would introduce too many alternative forms, like "English Language", etc. --Anatoli 23:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * But there is absolutely no reason why "assembly" should be in caps, because it isn't a language called "Assembly", it is the language used to assemble opcodes into machine code! If you don't know what it is, don't comment! Equinox ◑ 23:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * That's rude and arrogant and I comment when I want. If you read carefully, I'm not suggesting to keep the cap version. You don't need to explain to me what the assembly language is, I'm a programmer. --Anatoli 23:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I was unnecessarily aggressive about that. Sorry. Combination of too many beers and Rockpilot getting on my nerves. Equinox ◑ 22:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The capitalised forms that I can find are all titles of courses or books, so I agree that an entry with initial capitals is unnecessary. I'm surprised how many of us here have programmed in assembly language, though I've done more in machine code.  D b f  i  r  s   08:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Kept as alt.sp. If someone doubts it exists even as that, he can RFV it. Striking. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2012 (UTC)