I'm sure we could do this with ease, because we already can see the bytecodes.
https://godbolt.org/ Regards! Esteban A. Maringolo |
You can do that with the VMMaker package loaded. There is not all the UI, but you can print the assembly code in the Transcript. On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <[hidden email]> wrote: I'm sure we could do this with ease, because we already can see the bytecodes. Clément Béra Pharo consortium engineer Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq |
heheheheh I had a similar idea years ago [1]. It looks like I start implementing it [2], but I cannot find if I finished it or not LOL. On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
In reply to this post by Esteban A. Maringolo
Hi,
This is already available since some time in the GTInspector. You can just inspect a compiled method. You will get both the bytecode and the AST (with source tracking, too). In fact, this was one of the original reasons why GTInspector exists: I wanted to figure out how the AST is structured so that I can write queries against it :). Cheers, Doru On Oct 17, 2017, at 10:03 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <[hidden email]> wrote: |
Yeap GTInspector was the first thing that came to my mind , great tool :) On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:37 AM Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:
compiled-method-bytecode.png (132K) Download Attachment compiled-method-bytecode.png (132K) Download Attachment |
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sure, we just miss machine code :) But...AFAIR to get the machine code of a method it needs VMMaker to be loaded....
|
In reply to this post by kilon.alios
Dolphin's debugger was what came to my mind, it had the "dissasembly" way of debugging VM bytecode. It doesn't provide was native code ASM, and as I understand GTInspector neither. Regards! Esteban A. Maringolo 2017-10-18 6:55 GMT-03:00 Dimitris Chloupis <[hidden email]>:
dissasembly.png (130K) Download Attachment |
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]> wrote:
Yeah the machine code is what matters.
I was thinking of changing that, adding a primitive which answers a CogMethod as a bytearray, but you still need to use external libs such as gdb/lldb to disassemble your binary (which is possible but not working out of the box everywhere and it does not make sense to include that as part of the VM), and you still need something extracted from VMMaker to make sense out of the CogMethod header and CogMethod map, which has a lot of dependencies, so likely the whole VMMaker itself. And I'm not talking about all the different CogMethod flavors. With VMMaker loaded you can do it with in-image compilation but you will have the machine code with only unlinked sends. With linked send it's more difficult as you need to really simulate the whole runtime. Overall there's no amazing solution. In the example shown it's easier as in C++ the code is not modified while it runs and you've already have gdb/lldb APIs to show what they show.
Clément Béra Pharo consortium engineer Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq |
Hi,
> I was thinking of changing that, adding a primitive which answers a > CogMethod as a bytearray, but you still need to use external libs > such as gdb/lldb to disassemble your binary I use udis86 [1] for that purpose. Tiny, clean & dead easy to use. x86 only, though. HTH. Jan [1]: http://udis86.sourceforge.net/ > (which is possible but not working out of the box everywhere and it > does not make sense to include that as part of the VM), and you still > need something extracted from VMMaker to make sense out of the > CogMethod header and CogMethod map, which has a lot of dependencies, > so likely the whole VMMaker itself. And I'm not talking about all the > different CogMethod flavors. > > With VMMaker loaded you can do it with in-image compilation but you > will have the machine code with only unlinked sends. With linked send > it's more difficult as you need to really simulate the whole runtime. > > Overall there's no amazing solution. In the example shown it's easier > as in C++ the code is not modified while it runs and you've already > have gdb/lldb APIs to show what they show. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Doru > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 17, 2017, at 10:03 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@ > > > > gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm sure we could do this with ease, because we already can see > > > > the bytecodes. > > > > > > > > https://godbolt.org/ > > > > > > > > Regards! > > > > > > > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > www.tudorgirba.com > > > www.feenk.com > > > > > > "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > > > -- > Clément Béra > Pharo consortium engineer > https://clementbera.wordpress.com/ > Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq |
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Jan Vrany <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi, Tiny that's good. I normally use the facilities provided by the processor simulators (but that's not tiny). Not sure the production environment should have those features anyway
Clément Béra Pharo consortium engineer Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |