I beg to differ. Assembly is awesome. Some of the best times I've had programming were writing networking code (ethernet driver, TCP/IP stack, and HTTP server) in Z80 assembly. I wouldn't recommend assembly if you're writing something like a modern GUI app, but assembly on an embedded micro can be a lot of fun.
I still think my best work is a graphical library I built in 9th grade in assembly to use with my Pascal programs in MSDOS.
mov ax, 13h
int 10h ;SCREEN 13 rules!!![0]http://www.amazon.com/PC-Intern-Programming-Encyclopedia-Dev...
And kids these days, they just don't understand!
also a fun way to seize up your computer when you got it wrong, I mean it compiled it should run, right?
Years ago a "textfile group" I was involved with decided to release a 3 1/2" floppy diskette w/ our files at a hacker con. I thought it would be cool to put a custom bootsector on the disk-- something that displayed an easter egg rather than the boring traditional "Non-System disk or disk error" the bootloader on MS-DOS-formatted disks displayed.
I ended up making a simple static mode 0x13 display w/ a gradient background and a text message. When I tested it I discovered my message was being displayed backwards and in the wrong positions. I'd set the direction flag earlier in the code and neglected to clear it. I was preparing to add the one-byte "CLD" instruction when it hit me that I could just leave the code as-is and reverse the data. I saved a byte and the code did exactly what I wanted. I was quite happy.
You can't experience that kind of joy in a high level language.
I would prefer "what's near universally regarded as un-fun by programmers". Which would simply place you in the small minority, rather than being placed outside the universe of programmers. It could still be wrong, depending on the threshold for "near universal", but it wouldn't be obviously confusing.