I think the point is, if one were interested enough to do so, writing Assembly language code that 'does better' than Mathematica on tricky maths problems would - eventually - get as easy for one to do, as it is for you to use Mathematica.
No matter what your mental horsepower, a high-level language will allow you to accomplish more with a given amount of effort.
You are essentially arguing that tools don't matter, that a steam shovel ultimately offers no improvement over brute strength. Several millenia of human history beg to differ.
Words are not steam shovels. Steam shovels require a great deal of energy and effort to use properly.
Words, on the other hand, require very, very little energy to be useful. That is the point - the effort and energy required to learn what "(void )func(void );" is useful for is equivalent to the energy required to learn what "jmp %ax" is useful for ..
You cannot compare word-working with hard working. Words are flat - they all require a similar environment in order to function, namely that of a fertile mind and the interest to watch them grow in the name of usage.
I tried to think of something to say, but all that came out is: Not even wrong.
I really wish that it were somehow possible to force you to walk the walk and code only in assembler for the rest of your life. If all programming languages are truly equivalent, just why would this fate be so terrible?
Words are not steam shovels. Steam shovels require a great deal of energy and effort to use properly.
Words, on the other hand, require very, very little energy to be useful. That is the point - the effort and energy required to learn what "(void )func(void );" is useful for is equivalent to the energy required to learn what "jmp %ax" is useful for ..
You cannot compare word-working with hard working. Words are flat - they all require a similar environment in order to function, namely that of a fertile mind and the interest to watch them grow in the name of usage.
