World: r4wp
[#Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
DocKimbel 23-Dec-2012 [4786x2] | I'm working on objects and ports currently. |
I might release some other features for end of year though. | |
Janko 23-Dec-2012 [4788] | Yes, go Doc! I wish I was better at low-level programming so I could help a little. If there would be any examples of simple bindings or base of TCP that we could extend to different protocols I would try to participate a little. |
DocKimbel 23-Dec-2012 [4789] | Kaj, just a remark about Red and bindings: there is still an additional feature to come that will allow to import both Red/System and external libs functions directly in Red in a declarative way. It will use almost the same syntax as #import in Red/System but will convert the datatypes automatically (in the same way R2 does with routines and structs). A struct! datatype would then be added also to Red. The routine! datatype primary purpose is provide a way to write ultra-fast code and enable system programming, even if it can be also used to wrap Red/System bindings. I'm still unsure which approach would work the best for building bindings to C libraries. I guess you'll be the first to find out. ;-) |
Jerry 23-Dec-2012 [4790] | Red/System Question: In a function, a local variable v1 is declared as struct! [ v2 [integer!] ]. Once the function is called, v1 is in stack, v2 is in heap. When the function call is over, v1 is gone, but v2 is still in heap, right? |
Kaj 23-Dec-2012 [4791x4] | Yes, structs are currently always on the heap |
Well, static memory, actually, if you didn't create it with allocate | |
Doc, thanks for the heads-up. I'm also unsure which route to go, but I want to have the option to write Red/System only programs, so I guess I will usually build a Red binding on a Red/System binding | |
On the other hand, if a binding is mostly the #import section, the future format sounds more concise than writing all wrappers as routines | |
Jerry 23-Dec-2012 [4795x3] | Thanks. Kaj |
### Red/System Question ### To get cpu count, I can do this in C: sysctlbyname("hw.ncpu", &cpuCount, &len, ((void *)0), 0); But Red/System doesn't support &. How can I do this in Red/System? Thanks. | |
&cpuCount, &len are the two parameters that I don't know how to express in R/S. | |
Kaj 23-Dec-2012 [4798x3] | It does support &, but it's written : like in REBOL :-) |
Use :cpu-count :len | |
What does len specify? | |
Jerry 23-Dec-2012 [4801] | len ... the length of buffer in the next parameter??? not sure. |
DocKimbel 24-Dec-2012 [4802] | From Announce: Great Kaj! The optimizer should be able to do a pretty good job on simple cases like Fibonacci function. Still, you'll have the Red stack management overhead, which is currently unavoidable, but in the future, we might found ways to optimize it too. Actually, I have two options to reduce stack overhead: stack multiple openings/closing compression and inlining stack calls, but we'll see that in Red v2. |
Jerry 25-Dec-2012 [4803] | Red/System Questions: I am translating a piece of code from C to Red/System, I don't know how to translate the following C code: success = OSAtomicCompareAndSwapPtrBarrier(NULL, newzone, (void * volatile *)&_zone_); // C my problems are: 1. In Red/Sys, _sqliteZone_ is a struct! (which is a pointer in Red/Sys), so I cannot use :_zone_ to get it's address. 2. "(void * volatile *)" in C => "as byte-ptr!" in Red/Sys ?? Thanks! |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4804] | 1) Is _zone_ a struct or a struct pointer? If it is a struct, then in Red/System, you just pass the struct! variable. 2) Correct, use "as byte-ptr!" in such case. |
Jerry 25-Dec-2012 [4805] | 1. _zone_ is a struct pointer. I need to pass a pointer to a struct pointer as the 3rd parameter, that's why I try to use get-word here. |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4806] | For 1., you can achieve it this way: s: declare struct! [n [integer!]] p: declare int-ptr! p/value: as-integer s then `p` becomes a pointer on `s`. I might extend get-word syntax to struct! and pointer! too, someone just needs to add a ticket to Github to remind me of that. |
Jerry 25-Dec-2012 [4807] | Thanks, Doc |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4808x5] | I usually solve such double references by wrapping the needed pointer in an extra struct. See the *-reference! types here: |
http://red.esperconsultancy.nl/Red-common/artifact/aad3c29d7fb6647bb1e5d8b404d05211f5ed33c1 | |
Speaking about atomic operations, any thought to get them in Red/System? I could use them well | |
Perhaps an atomic! type for an integer with guarantees about the generated code? | |
What are the chances that current integer operations already have atomic behaviour? | |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4813x3] | I'm not sure what you mean by "atomic operation"? |
Red/System integer! operations are as atomic as the CPU permits. | |
Red/System maps its datatypes as closely as possible to the CPU (the same way C does). | |
Andreas 25-Dec-2012 [4816] | Re atomic operation: atomic "x: x + 1", for example. |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4817x3] | Atomic means safe from corruptions by other CPU cores accessing the same memory |
http://syllable.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/syllable/syllable/system/sys/include/atheos/atomic.h?view=markup | |
These become vital when you start doing multi-core concurrency | |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4820] | Ok, I see what you mean. Like in C, you can already write "thread-safe" code in Red/System by using only variables on stack. If you need concurrent access to global variables, usually, the OS are already providing some API for that (locks, semaphores, mutex,...). I haven't chosen yet how it will be implemented at Red/System level, there are different options. For example, it could be handled by the language directly using a similar construct as in Java: synchronize [ x: x + 1 ] In my early design notes, I have researched only how to handle concurrency at Red level, I've left the underlying Red/System part as an "implementation detail". I plan to start working on it after I/O will be implemented. |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4821x2] | I'm thinking about the case where you want to implement operating system level code yourself. For example, I have been fixing many bugs in Syllable's PThreads implementation, but I would like to replace it with a Red/System implementation. PThreads adds quite a few constructs that Syllable's kernel primitives don't implement as such, so to add them you need to write extra concurrency code |
For example, there are spinlock-like constructions in Syllable's PThreads implementation that can often prevent having to call a kernel mutex. This makes them much more efficient, but you need atomic operations on access flags and counters to implement the user-space spinlocks and mutex shells | |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4823] | Modern CPU usually provide a way to make such atomic operations (e.g. CAS-type instructions), Red/System might provide access to them if it is required. |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4824] | Something like that is what I have in mind. From what CPUs on are they supported? |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4825] | From a quick googling, I've found: - x86: CMPXCHG (compare and exchange) is supported from 486. LOCK instruction seems to be available from PentiumPro only. - ARM: Starting with the ARMv6 architecture ARM has the LDREX/STREX instructions that can be used to implement an atomic compare-exchange operation. |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4826x2] | So it would bump Red's requirements a little, but I guess it's worth it |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compare-and-swap | |
Jerry 25-Dec-2012 [4828x2] | In current Red/System, there is no break/continue keywords (for loop), I wish they will show up in Red/System 2.0 |
So how can I break/continue a loop now? | |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4830x2] | BREAK will probably be implemented before 2.0 (not sure for CONTINUE). So, you can't break from a loop currently. As a workaround, you can EXIT/RETURN instead. So if you write your loop in a separate function, you'll get similar effect as with BREAK. |
I'm a bit late for the Xmas release, sorry...still fixing bugs... | |
Kaj 25-Dec-2012 [4832] | I thought we already had a Xmas release :-) |
DocKimbel 25-Dec-2012 [4833x3] | Actually, it is not really a new release, as I did too many changes and it would need a week at least to stabilize and fully complete. But it will be a significant revision. ;-) |
revision = commit | |
I've stressed the current Red runtime source code a bit so it keeps "tilting" as I try to make it work. :-) | |
older newer | first last |