World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Andreas 18-Mar-2011 [525] | i'll at least have a look or two :) |
Kaj 18-Mar-2011 [526x2] | That would be cool |
readelf gave me the impression that section and program headers are the same | |
Dockimbel 18-Mar-2011 [528] | Program headers describe segments. Segments are composed of one or several sections merged together. In our current ELF implementation, each segment contains only one section, so headers should be almost the same. That will change with the addition of dynamic linking support (which seem to require a lot of additional sections). |
Kaj 18-Mar-2011 [529x2] | That could be the reason that our loader always expects segment headers, because a Syllable program is also a dynamic library |
I think we ran into the multiple sections per segment problem halfway our development, when we needed to implement it | |
BrianH 19-Mar-2011 [531x2] | Wouldn't position-independent code be required even on Windows if you wanted to support address space layout randomization (ASLR) and other such tricks? |
It also helps when running Windows code on fake Windows-like OSes like SanOS that load at a different address. | |
Dockimbel 19-Mar-2011 [533x2] | ASLR: I suppose it's required, but I can't find any information from an official source explaining the exact requirement for ASLR on Windows (except the additional flag to set in the executable header). While searching for that, I found this interesting reading about PIC: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/pic-internals.xml#doc_chap7 |
I would like, if possible, to support PIC without the additional cost of an indirection table for global data. | |
Andreas 19-Mar-2011 [535x4] | Brian: loading at a different address should not be a problem, for that, relocatable code is sufficient. Full ASLR, however, will require not only relocatable but position-independent code. |
(Take that with a sufficiently sized grain of salt, as I don't know anything about how ASLR on Windows works. But I find it hard to imagine how they would get away without PIC :) | |
But at least for PaX-based Linux ELF ASLR, full ASLR requires "position-independent executables" (PIE) which are ELF binaries with a special type flag and PIC. | |
But I guess I wouldn't worry about ASLR for Red at this point :)) | |
Kaj 19-Mar-2011 [539] | Interesting, it sounds like Syllable is prepared for that :-) |
Andreas 19-Mar-2011 [540x2] | You have PaX on Syllable? |
Some basic ASLR (stack randomisation and mmap-base randomisation) was added to the mainline Linux kernel in 2.6.12: http://lwn.net/Articles/121845/ | |
Kaj 19-Mar-2011 [542] | We don't have PaX, we have PIC executables, as far as I know |
Andreas 19-Mar-2011 [543] | Beyond that, full ASLR is still quite rare in Linux, at least as far as I know. |
Dockimbel 19-Mar-2011 [544] | New revision released: preprocessor replaced by a new one running at block-level (so much more accurate now). Includes and simple macros are now also possible. |
Kaj 19-Mar-2011 [545x2] | Those are some good improvements |
Includes make Red a real programming language :-) | |
Dockimbel 19-Mar-2011 [547] | Well, that's not my intention, but it wouldn't need much to make it a C replacement language. |
Andreas 20-Mar-2011 [548x3] | i have a first crude hack of a ELF section header table working. it can currently describe itself :) |
builds/hello: file format elf32-i386 Sections: Idx Name Size VMA LMA File off Algn 0 .shstrtab ... | |
Here we go, hello.reds now results in a 1065 bytes binary (882 previously). For this bloat, you get the following information: Section Headers: [Nr] Name Type Addr Off Size ES Flg Lk Inf Al [ 0] NULL 00000000 000000 000000 00 0 0 0 [ 1] .text PROGBITS 08048074 000074 000290 00 AX 0 0 4 [ 2] .data PROGBITS 08048304 000304 000085 00 WA 0 0 4 [ 3] .shstrtab STRTAB 00000000 000372 000017 00 0 0 1 | |
Dockimbel 20-Mar-2011 [551] | Nice! |
Pavel 23-Mar-2011 [552] | http://www.agner.org/optimize/promise convertor for obj files from PE, ELF to Mach-O and vice versa if it would help |
Dockimbel 23-Mar-2011 [553] | Well, Red will probably not have to deal with object files directly, but anyway there are some good resources there. Too bad, the asm optimized subroutine library is not LGPL... |
Robert 23-Mar-2011 [554] | Ask, and I'm sure you will get a LGPL version. |
Kaj 23-Mar-2011 [555] | You'd be surprised |
Dockimbel 23-Mar-2011 [556] | Well, I'll try it when the need for such optimized code will come (not in the short-term). I'll probably need a subset only. |
BrianH 23-Mar-2011 [557x2] | Why would you want an LGPL library for a BSD language? |
For that matter, why would he make a GPL library for tutorial purposes? You can get in legal trouble for reading that code if you actually use what you learn to write code that isn't GPL licensed. This seems like poor planning, or just being mean. Is there at least a commercial license? | |
Andreas 23-Mar-2011 [559] | there is. and where do you get the idea from that this library is for tutorial purposes? |
Dockimbel 23-Mar-2011 [560x4] | Brian: I don't intend to make Red deviate from the BSD road in anyway, I'm very much attached to keep it as open as possible. If some 3rd- party libraries with compatible license, can be used to add *optional* features, that shouldn't be a problem. The official Red distribution will always stay BSD. |
Btw, I usually try not to read GPL code for features that I might have to implement in my pubic projects (not only Red). I've also stayed away from the host-kit source code for the same reason, knowing that I might have to work on similar features someday. | |
I didn't read the asm subroutine library source code, just the Manual, which is very informative. | |
Each routine has several implementations depending on the features available at runtime in the CPU (SSE, SSE2, SSE3,...). So, it's a bit too large for my needs (I would prefer selecting the best implementation at compile-time). | |
Kaj 23-Mar-2011 [564x3] | A few wildly different observations |
I usually try to refrain from being a spelling nazi, but I did have a snicker at "pubic projects (not only Red)" :-) | |
The host kit is published but the licence is undetermined, so you could argue it's public domain | |
Dockimbel 23-Mar-2011 [567] | Hehe :-) Shouldn't chat on AltME while working. |
Kaj 23-Mar-2011 [568] | At least not about those projects :-) |
Andreas 23-Mar-2011 [569] | Unfortunately, the public domain argument won't get far: ** Copyright 2010 REBOL Technologies ** All rights reserved. |
Kaj 23-Mar-2011 [570] | I just mean to say that Carl is creating a problem for himself by publishing with the monicker "open source" but undetermined licence |
Andreas 23-Mar-2011 [571] | Absolutely. |
TomBon 23-Mar-2011 [572] | or just take it as WTFPL |
Kaj 23-Mar-2011 [573x2] | Even apart from the continuous creation of uncertainty, which everyone knows kills business |
Anyway, it's hard to keep up with Red development. :-) I meant to say that in an unconnected context | |
older newer | first last |