Low and High Level Languages Exam Questions

• A It can manipulate the hardware directly (1)
• The only correct answer is A. The correct answer is it can manipulate the hardware directly.
• B is not correct because data structures such as arrays and records are a characteristic of high-level languages
• C is not correct because low-level languages are processor/machine dependent, so they are not machine independent
• D is not correct because in a low-level language one instruction translates into one machine code instruction

• A Assembly language (1)
• The only correct answer is A. The correct answer is assembly language.
• B is not correct because C# is a high-level language
• C is not correct because Java is a high-level language
• D is not correct because Python is a high-level language

• A Machine independent (1)
• The only correct answer is A. The correct answer is machine independent.
• B is not correct because low-level languages are processor specific, so their programs cannot easily be moved to another processor
• C is not correct because object code is the machine code output produced by a translator
• D is not correct because processor specific describes code that only runs on one type of processor

• B It is easier to learn, write and debug (1)
• The only correct answer is B. The correct answer is easier to learn, write and debug.
• A is not correct because direct control of the hardware is a reason for using a low-level language
• C is not correct because a low-level language produces smaller executable code
• D is not correct because low-level programs run more quickly than high-level programs

Award one mark for:

• Several/multiple machine code instructions (1)

The answer must refer to instructions.

Do not accept machine code on its own.

Do not accept binary on its own.

Do not accept 'one or more machine code instructions' as it does not show that one statement becomes several instructions.

Do not accept assembly code/compiled code/low-level code on their own.

Do not accept 'a line of code'/'a statement' as this repeats the question.

Award one mark for any of the following up to a maximum of two marks:

• Uses statements/instructions that look like English/maths (1)
• Does not depend on one type of processor / can be run on different types of computer with few or no changes (machine independent) (1)
• A single statement is translated into several machine code instructions (1)
• Provides data structures such as arrays and records (1)
• Provides built-in/library subprograms (1)
• Is translated by a compiler or an interpreter (1)

Allow portable/platform independent for machine independent.

Allow easier to read/write/understand/debug only when linked to the English-like statements, e.g. uses words that look like English so it is easier to understand.

Do not accept a high-level language / not a low-level language with no other detail.

Do not accept written in binary/machine code.

Do not accept faster to run / uses less memory, as these are characteristics of low-level languages.

Award one mark for any of the following up to a maximum of two marks:

• It can control/manipulate the hardware (components/registers/memory locations) directly (1)
• Each instruction maps to a single machine-code instruction, so the behaviour/timing can be controlled precisely (1)
• The code can run very quickly / has a fast execution time (1)
• The code uses less memory/RAM (1)
• The code can be optimised for a particular processor/chipset (1)

Only award one mark where both 'controls the hardware' and 'accesses registers/memory locations' are given, as these are the same point.

Do not accept 'it is closer to the hardware' without saying that it controls or accesses the hardware directly.

Do not accept easier/faster to write/program/learn/understand/debug (these are advantages of high-level languages).

Do not accept faster/quicker without qualification.

Do not accept portable/machine independent.

Do not accept does not need to be translated/compiled (assembly language must be assembled).

Do not accept it is a low-level language / a repeat of the question.

Award one mark for any of the following up to a maximum of two marks:

• The (same) program/source code can run on different types/makes of computer/processor (1)
• With few/no changes (to the program code) (1)
• The same source code can be translated for each type of processor (1)
• A different compiler/interpreter is used for each type of processor (1)
• The program does not depend on one specific type of processor/hardware (1)
• Only one version of the program needs to be written/kept (1)
• The program is portable between different computers (1)

Allow 'different computers' as meaning different types of computer/processor.

Do not accept a program that will only run on one type of computer / the computer it was written on.

Do not accept written in machine code/binary, is translated into machine code, compiled/interpreted, is a low-level language.

Award up to two marks for a linked description such as:

• Statements are written using words/phrases that look like English or maths (1) so the code is easier to read/understand/write (1)
• One statement is translated into several machine code instructions (1) so programs are shorter to write than in a low-level language (1)
• High-level languages provide built-in data structures such as arrays/lists/records (1) so a collection of data items can be stored and accessed under one name (1)

Do not accept responses that only give a benefit or drawback, such as 'it is easier to learn', with no characteristic.

Do not accept 'it is easier than a low-level language' without saying what the characteristic is.

Award up to two marks for a linked description such as:

• The same source code can be run on different types/makes of processor (1) with few or no changes being made to the program (1)
• A compiler/interpreter is available for each type of processor (1) to translate the source code into the machine code for that processor (1)
• The statements are not tied to one processor's instruction set (1) so the program is portable between different computers (1)

Do not accept 'it is translated by a compiler' on its own.

Do not accept 'the program does not need to be translated' or 'it is easier to use'.

Award up to two marks for a linked description such as:

• Instructions can manipulate/control the hardware/memory/registers directly (1) so the driver can control the specific device it is written for (1)
• The code is written for one specific processor/architecture (1) so it works with the exact hardware it will control (1)
• The programmer controls exactly how memory/registers are used (1) so the code is efficient and needs little memory, which suits a device that has limited memory (1)
• Each instruction maps to one machine code instruction (1) so the driver code is small enough to fit in the memory of the device (1)

Extra detail, such as naming the device the driver controls, is not needed to earn the marks.

Do not accept 'it is closer to machine code' on its own: it must be developed to show how this helps the driver, e.g. it can control the hardware directly.

Do not accept 'it is faster/quicker' with no link to the hardware/device, e.g. the device responds quickly.

Do not accept 'it is easier to learn', 'it is easier to debug' or 'it takes less time to write'.

Award up to two marks for a linked description such as:

• The processor/CPU can only execute machine code/binary instructions (1) so the assembly instructions must be converted into machine code before the program can run (1)
• Each assembly instruction/mnemonic matches/corresponds to one machine code instruction (1) so each line must be replaced with the machine code the processor executes (1)
• The program is written using mnemonics (1) that must be translated into machine code for the processor to carry out the instructions (1)
• The hardware/processor does not understand assembly language directly (1) so it must be translated into machine code that the processor can execute (1)

Do not accept 'assembly language is a low-level language'.

Do not accept 'it is hard to understand' or 'it is not English'.

Do not accept benefits, such as 'machine code runs faster' or 'the program will run more quickly'.

Do not accept 'an assembler/a translator converts it' on its own, with no reference to the processor only being able to execute machine code/binary.

Do not accept responses about high-level languages or about compilers/interpreters.

Award up to two marks for a linked explanation such as:

• The same source code can be used on different processors (1) because a compiler/interpreter for each processor translates it into that processor's machine code/instructions (1)
• The program is machine/processor independent (1) because the code is translated into the machine code/instructions of each processor it is run on (1)
• A different compiler/interpreter is used for each type of processor (1) so the same source code can be translated into each processor's machine code/instructions (1)
• The program can be moved/copied to a computer with a different processor (1) because a compiler/interpreter that produces code for that processor exists (1)

For both marks, the expansion must follow/associate with the statement.

Do not accept 'it is portable' without a linked reason about translation for different processors.

Do not accept 'it is easier to use/read/write' on its own without a linked reason about translation/processors.

Do not accept 'it is not written in binary'/'it is not machine code'/'it is not written in assembly language' as the reason without saying that the code is translated into each processor's machine code/instructions.

Do not accept the misconception that the program runs directly on any processor without being translated.

Award up to two marks for a linked explanation such as:

• The programmer can control/manipulate the hardware directly (1) because low-level instructions can access registers/memory addresses/hardware features (1)
• The code can be made to work efficiently with a specific device (1) because low-level languages are processor/chipset specific, so the instructions match that hardware (1)
• The code produced is fast to execute (1) because it is optimised for the specific processor/uses few instructions (1)
• The code produced is small (1) so it fits in the limited memory/ROM available in the device (1)

For both marks, the expansion must follow/associate with the statement.

Fast execution and small code size are typical advantages of low-level languages; award them only where the linked reason relates to the device.

Do not accept 'it is easier to write/learn/understand' or 'it is faster to write' as a point or as the expansion, because low-level languages are not easier for these.

Do not accept 'it is close to the hardware' or 'it works with hardware' without expansion of what that allows the program to do.

Do not accept 'because it is low-level' as the expansion; the answer must say what the language/hardware allows.

Award up to two marks for a linked explanation such as:

• Statements are written in English-like words/use maths symbols (1) so the programmer can understand more easily what each one does (1)
• The language uses meaningful names for variables/structured constructs such as loops (1) so the code is easier to read/follow (1)
• One statement translates into several machine code instructions (1) so there are fewer instructions to learn/understand for the same task (1)

For both marks, the expansion must follow/associate with the statement.

Do not accept 'it is easier' / 'it is simpler' on its own, without saying what is easier/simpler.

Do not accept 'the computer understands it directly' / 'it does not need translating'.

Do not award answers about the program running faster or using less memory, as these are not about ease of learning.

Award up to two marks for a linked explanation such as:

• The programmer can choose the most efficient instructions/registers to use (1) so the program completes its task in fewer steps (1)
• The programmer can optimise the code for the processor (1) because low-level instructions give direct control of registers/memory (1)
• Each low-level instruction maps to one machine code instruction (1) so fewer instructions are executed than for the equivalent high-level code (1)
• The translated code is smaller (1) so fewer instructions are fetched from memory and executed (1)

For both marks, the expansion must follow/associate with the statement.

Do not accept 'it is low-level' / 'it is closer to machine code' / 'low-level code is faster' on its own without a reason why it makes the program run faster.

Do not accept 'high-level code has to be translated' / 'high-level code is interpreted' on its own without saying why that makes the program slower.

Do not accept 'the code is smaller' on its own without saying that this means fewer instructions are fetched/executed.

Do not accept 'it is easier to write' or 'quicker to type' as a reason for faster execution.

Indicative content

Ease of learning, use and debug

• High-level language statements are written in English-like words and mathematical symbols, so the students can read the quiz game code and understand what each line does.
• The language is easier to learn than a low-level language, so students who are new to programming can start writing the quiz game quickly.
• Errors are easier to find and fix because the code is readable; for example, the students can check a line that updates a score against the rule they intended.
• The students do not need to know how the processor carries out each statement, so they can concentrate on the quiz questions and rules.

Data structures

• High-level languages provide lists or arrays, so the names and scores of all the players can be stored under one name and processed with a loop.
• A record can store a player's name and score as one item; in some languages a dictionary or class can be used instead, which keeps related data together.
• Using a data structure makes the code shorter and easier to understand than separate variables for every player's name and score.

Built-in functions and library routines

• High-level languages provide built-in functions such as print and input, so the students can display a question and read a player's answer without writing the underlying code.
• Library routines such as a random number generator can be used to choose quiz questions, saving the students time.
• String-handling routines can check or compare a player's answer, so the students do not have to write these routines themselves.
• Reusing tested routines reduces the amount of code the students write and can reduce errors in the quiz game.

Levels

• Level 0 (0 marks): No rewardable content.
• Level 1 (1–2 marks): Basic, independent points are made, showing elements of understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion will contain basic information with little linkage between points made or application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 2 (3–4 marks): Demonstrates adequate understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion shows some linkages and lines of reasoning with some structure and application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 3 (5–6 marks): Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science to support the discussion being presented. (AO1) The discussion is well developed, with sustained lines of reasoning that are coherent and logically structured, and which clearly apply to the context. (AO2)

Additional guidance: Credit only points applied to the quiz game and the students; comparison with low-level languages is not required, but a correct contrast may support a point if it is applied. Do not award generic claims such as 'high-level programs run faster', 'work on any computer' or 'students do not need to learn syntax' unless they are justified for the quiz game.

Level 3 responses must cover all three bullet areas with linked reasoning that explains why the characteristic helps the students finish the game quickly with few errors; an answer covering only two bullet areas is limited to Level 2. Do not award the idea that high-level code is already machine code or is understood directly by the processor. Accept dictionaries or classes as equivalents of records.

Indicative content

Control of the hardware

• Low-level languages can read and write the contents of registers and memory addresses directly, so the firmware can take the values from the distance sensors without calling a library routine.
• Assembly language instructions can read from and write to specific input/output ports on the vacuum cleaner's processor, so the motors can be switched on and off directly.
• The programmer decides exactly which processor operations are carried out and in which order, which matters when the vacuum must reverse away from a step or an obstacle.
• A low-level language puts nothing between the program and the hardware, so the programmer can control the hardware of the vacuum cleaner precisely.

Efficiency of the code

• Assembly language code can be hand-optimised instruction by instruction, so the code that checks a sensor is as short as possible.
• The programmer can choose which registers hold values that are used again and again, which cuts down the number of memory accesses the firmware needs.
• A hand-written low-level program can be made compact, so it is more likely to fit in the small amount of memory the vacuum cleaner has.
• Because each instruction does one defined job, the time taken to react to a sensor reading is predictable, which suits firmware that must not overrun.

Link between the language and the processor

• Low-level languages are processor-specific, so the instructions used are those of the exact processor in the vacuum cleaner rather than general statements that need translating.
• Each assembly language instruction maps to one machine code instruction, so the programmer knows precisely which processor operation will be carried out by each line of code.
• An assembler turns each mnemonic into its machine code equivalent, so the machine code running on the vacuum cleaner's processor is exactly what the programmer wrote.
• Code written for a different processor would have to be rewritten, which is acceptable here because the vacuum cleaner always uses the same processor.

Levels

• Level 0 (0 marks): No rewardable content.
• Level 1 (1–2 marks): Basic, independent points are made, showing elements of understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion will contain basic information with little linkage between points made or application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 2 (3–4 marks): Demonstrates adequate understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion shows some linkages and lines of reasoning with some structure and application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 3 (5–6 marks): Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science to support the discussion being presented. (AO1) The discussion is well developed, with sustained lines of reasoning that are coherent and logically structured, and which clearly apply to the context. (AO2)

Within Level 1, award 1 mark for a single basic point and 2 marks for two or more independent basic points; Level 2 requires the points to be linked to the vacuum cleaner; Level 3 requires both control of the hardware and efficiency of the code, and a few concise, linked sentences can reach Level 3, so extra length is not required.

Accept registers, memory addresses, input/output ports, machine code and mnemonics as ways of describing access to the hardware, and accept 'a low-level language is faster' as a basic point on its own. Do not award 'binary is a low-level language' (machine code is written in binary, but binary is not a language), or characteristics of high-level languages such as being easy to read or portable, as characteristics of a low-level language.

Indicative content

Machine independence

• A high-level language is machine independent, so the same source code can be run on different types of computer with few or no changes.
• The company can write the program once and sell it to users with different computers, without rewriting the code for each type of computer.
• Only one version of the program needs to be written and maintained, so development takes the company less time.

Processor specificity

• A low-level language is processor-specific, so a program written for one processor will not run on a different processor without being rewritten.
• Assembly language instructions depend on the instruction set of the particular processor, so the company would need a separate version of the program for each type of computer.
• Writing a separate low-level version for every type of computer would take the company much longer than writing one high-level program.
• Low-level code gives direct control of the hardware of one processor, so it is better suited to device drivers than to a program that must run on many different computers.

Translation

• High-level source code is translated for each type of computer by a compiler or an interpreter, so one version of the source code is enough for all the users.
• Assembly language is translated into machine code by an assembler, and the assembler produces machine code for one specific processor only.
• Machine code is already in a form that one particular processor can execute directly, but the same machine code will not run on a different processor.
• Each high-level statement translates into several machine code instructions, so the programmer does not need to know the instruction set of the processor.

Levels

• Level 0 (0 marks): No rewardable content.
• Level 1 (1–2 marks): Basic, independent points are made, showing elements of understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion will contain basic information with little linkage between points made or application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 2 (3–4 marks): Demonstrates adequate understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion shows some linkages and lines of reasoning with some structure and application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 3 (5–6 marks): Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science to support the discussion being presented. (AO1) The discussion is well developed, with sustained lines of reasoning that are coherent and logically structured, and which clearly apply to the context. (AO2)

Additional guidance

• Level 3 responses must cover both high-level machine independence and low-level processor specificity, with the effect on the company's decision.
• Do not award low-level language, assembly language or machine code as portable, or 'high-level languages are written in English/like English' as a reason for machine independence.