Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Debug build with VS2010 professional array bounds checking is at link. The first check is a library debug level check. So, if you compile the viewer debug and don't have prebuilt libraries that are also debug built at the same level the link stops with file.obj is at a different level than ilb.obj--- Some pre built libs are not available as debug. On Saturday, May 10, 2014 12:15 AM, Tateru Nino tateru.n...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/05/2014 2:35 AM, Brian McGroarty wrote: On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Nicky D. sl.nicky...@googlemail.com wrote: True, but on the other hand, you'd never call array[i] with i out of array bound (it would be a bug, and throwing an exception via the use of at(i) is no better than undefined behaviour that will also lead to a crash in the end). Wrong. See Heartbleed. Slight tangent, but I love these kinds of shares: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/211963 http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-vs-mallocconf http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/analysis-of-openssl-freelist-reuse tl;dr: Heartbleed persisted for so long because even though checking existed, the OpenSSL engineers built their own heap management that sat on top of anything provided by the OS and compiler vendors' libraries. Then, nobody created a unit test or other check that validated behavior without their heap management in place. It should be The Least-Surprising Thing Ever that the library then became uncompileable without the less secure heap manager. I don't see an argument for an expensive extra check in production builds in either HeartBleed or our own use of vectors. Rather, making sure the case is covered in unit tests and/or debug builds could save the day. Totally agree. There's no need (or desirability) to check constantly in production code, if you can achieve the same results with proper testing. Solid foundations don't guarantee a solid structure, but shaky foundations always undermine any structure you try put on top of it. The important thing is to make sure that constant bounds-checking in production code is never necessary . ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
Hi, And what did they terll you there? Please share, I'm banging my head against the same thing. Cheers, LC Am Donnerstag, 8. Mai 2014, 15:34:39 schrieb Nicky Perian: Never mind, got guidance from the #opensl On Thursday, May 8, 2014 4:48 PM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote: LLDynamicArray was dropped in viewer-interesting. What is the replacement for it? Nicky l ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Fri, 09 May 2014 09:24:41 +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: Hi, And what did they terll you there? Please share, I'm banging my head against the same thing. Cheers, LC Am Donnerstag, 8. Mai 2014, 15:34:39 schrieb Nicky Perian: Never mind, got guidance from the #opensl On Thursday, May 8, 2014 4:48 PM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote: LLDynamicArray was dropped in viewer-interesting. What is the replacement for it? Nicky LLDynamicArray is nothing else than a wrapper around std::vector (it is probably one of the sequels of a time when the viewer code did not yet use the C++ standard library, i.e. a prehistoric and pre-Open-Souce time). Simply replace LLDynamicArrayType with std::vectorType array and use array.push_back(Type) instead of array.put(Type), array.size() instead of array.count(), array[i] instead of array.get(i), etc... Henri. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
bring up lldarray.h from the old version. Look at the underlying code for the std::vector methods that were wrapped there. add #includevector where needed. find std::vector method in the standard. using the standard and the old header modify the code.___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
forgot the link to the standard cppreference.com cppreference.com optional (library fundamentals TS) any (library fundamentals TS) string_view (library fundamentals TS) memory_resource (library fundamentals TS) Filesystem library (filesystem TS) View on en.cppreference.com Preview by Yahoo from #opensl LiruCookies On Friday, May 9, 2014 5:08 AM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote: bring up lldarray.h from the old version. Look at the underlying code for the std::vector methods that were wrapped there. add #includevector where needed. find std::vector method in the standard. using the standard and the old header modify the code. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
array[i] instead of array.get(i), etc...
old code snip const Type get(S32 index) const { return
std::vectorType::operator[](index); }
Is array[i] same as operator[](i) ?
I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting,
Nicky
On Friday, May 9, 2014 6:14 AM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote:
forgot the link to the standard
cppreference.com
cppreference.com
optional (library fundamentals TS) any (library fundamentals TS) string_view
(library fundamentals TS) memory_resource (library fundamentals TS)
Filesystem library (filesystem TS)
View on en.cppreference.com Preview by Yahoo
from #opensl LiruCookies
On Friday, May 9, 2014 5:08 AM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote:
bring up lldarray.h from the old version. Look at the underlying code for the
std::vector methods that were wrapped there.
add #includevector where needed. find std::vector method in the standard.
using the standard and the old header modify the code.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Fri, 9 May 2014 05:17:42 -0700 (PDT), Nicky Perian wrote:
array[i] instead of array.get(i), etc...
old code snip const Type get(S32 index) const { return
std::vectorType::operator[](index); }
Is array[i] same as operator[](i) ?
Yep. It's just the way the [] operator is declared in C++. See:
http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/vector/vector/operator%5B%5D/
I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting,
With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent.
Henri.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. vector::at will do a runtime check if the index is out of bounds, in that case it throws an exception. vector::operator[] will not do this check, causing undefined behavior when accessing elements out of bounds. Nicky ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:37:15 schrieb Nicky D.: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. So what would i do with a items-get(i) (excuse my stupid)? Cheers LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
haven't tried, looks like the best choice is items-array.at(i) On Friday, May 9, 2014 8:47 AM, Lance Corrimal lance.corri...@eregion.de wrote: Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:37:15 schrieb Nicky D.: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. So what would i do with a items-get(i) (excuse my stupid)? Cheers LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
array-at(i), if 'array' is a pointer to a vector. --Chalice Yao On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Lance Corrimal lance.corri...@eregion.dewrote: Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:37:15 schrieb Nicky D.: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. So what would i do with a items-get(i) (excuse my stupid)? Cheers LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
make that items-at(i) to match your example. On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Ambrosia chaoss...@gmail.com wrote: array-at(i), if 'array' is a pointer to a vector. --Chalice Yao On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Lance Corrimal lance.corri...@eregion.dewrote: Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:37:15 schrieb Nicky D.: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. So what would i do with a items-get(i) (excuse my stupid)? Cheers LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
I have a copy of viewer-interesting that I patched with code from my NaCl-release repo. I can upload it to my repo later so you can see examples of how I converted custom code to the new types. On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote: haven't tried, looks like the best choice is items-array.at(i) On Friday, May 9, 2014 8:47 AM, Lance Corrimal lance.corri...@eregion.de wrote: Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:37:15 schrieb Nicky D.: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. So what would i do with a items-get(i) (excuse my stupid)? Cheers LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 15:54:10 schrieb Ambrosia: make that items-at(i) to match your example. On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Ambrosia chaoss...@gmail.com wrote: array-at(i), if 'array' is a pointer to a vector. Thanks!!! Cheers, LC ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Fri, 9 May 2014 15:37:15 +0200, Nicky D. wrote: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. vector::at will do a runtime check if the index is out of bounds, in that case it throws an exception. vector::operator[] will not do this check, causing undefined behavior when accessing elements out of bounds. True, but on the other hand, you'd never call array[i] with i out of array bound (it would be a bug, and throwing an exception via the use of at(i) is no better than undefined behaviour that will also lead to a crash in the end). The fact that array[i] doesn't check the upper bound also makes it faster than array.at(i): competent programmers who do check for bounds where actually needed will therefore prefer array[i] to array.at(i), esspecially when used in a loop ! Henri. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
True, but on the other hand, you'd never call array[i] with i out of array bound (it would be a bug, and throwing an exception via the use of at(i) is no better than undefined behaviour that will also lead to a crash in the end). Wrong. See Heartbleed. It depends on if the page behind the last element is valid and how you use the memory. That's why it is undefined. Because no one can say. The exception at least would have terminated the buggy code and not sent private sessions keys to someone else. It's buggy no matter what, agreed to that. But at at least in one case it goes down right away without happily processing whatever data first. The fact that array[i] doesn't check the upper bound also makes it faster than array.at(i): competent programmers who do check for bounds where actually needed will therefore prefer array[i] to array.at(i), esspecially when used in a loop ! Agreed. Nicky ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Nicky D. sl.nicky...@googlemail.com wrote: I notice operator[](i) is used in the interesting, With std::vector, you could also use array.at(i), which is equivalent. vector::at will do a runtime check if the index is out of bounds, in that case it throws an exception. vector::operator[] will not do this check, causing undefined behavior when accessing elements out of bounds. Slight tweak: [] on out of bounds members is undefined, but specific implementations may still check. Most (maybe even all) STL implementations support bounds checking with a compile flag. If anyone's eager to experiment, it would be nice to add that to the debug build flags and see if debugging performance is still tolerable on all platforms. -- *Brian McGroarty *| Application Security, Platform Engineering *Linden Lab* | Makers of Shared Creative Spaces http://lindenlab.com/ ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Nicky D. sl.nicky...@googlemail.com wrote: True, but on the other hand, you'd never call array[i] with i out of array bound (it would be a bug, and throwing an exception via the use of at(i) is no better than undefined behaviour that will also lead to a crash in the end). Wrong. See Heartbleed. Slight tangent, but I love these kinds of shares: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/211963 http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-vs-mallocconf http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/analysis-of-openssl-freelist-reuse tl;dr: Heartbleed persisted for so long because even though checking existed, the OpenSSL engineers built their own heap management that sat on top of anything provided by the OS and compiler vendors' libraries. Then, nobody created a unit test or other check that validated behavior without their heap management in place. It should be The Least-Surprising Thing Ever that the library then became uncompileable without the less secure heap manager. I don't see an argument for an expensive extra check in production builds in either HeartBleed or our own use of vectors. Rather, making sure the case is covered in unit tests and/or debug builds could save the day. -- *Brian McGroarty *| Application Security, Platform Engineering *Linden Lab* | Makers of Shared Creative Spaces http://lindenlab.com/ ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
Slight tweak: [] on out of bounds members is undefined, but specific implementations may still check. Most (maybe even all) STL implementations support bounds checking with a compile flag. If anyone's eager to experiment, it would be nice to add that to the debug build flags and see if debugging performance is still tolerable on all platforms. Visual Studio controls this in various forms via _ITERATOR_DEBUG_LEVEL/_SECURE_SCL and _HAS_ITERATOR_DEBUGGING. To my knowledge is this enabled for any Windows debug build. Nicky ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
On 10/05/2014 2:35 AM, Brian McGroarty wrote: On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Nicky D. sl.nicky...@googlemail.com mailto:sl.nicky...@googlemail.com wrote: True, but on the other hand, you'd never call array[i] with i out of array bound (it would be a bug, and throwing an exception via the use of at(i) is no better than undefined behaviour that will also lead to a crash in the end). Wrong. See Heartbleed. Slight tangent, but I love these kinds of shares: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/211963 http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-vs-mallocconf http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/analysis-of-openssl-freelist-reuse tl;dr: Heartbleed persisted for so long because even though checking existed, the OpenSSL engineers built their own heap management that sat on top of anything provided by the OS and compiler vendors' libraries. Then, nobody created a unit test or other check that validated behavior without their heap management in place. It should be The Least-Surprising Thing Ever that the library then became uncompileable without the less secure heap manager. I don't see an argument for an expensive extra check in production builds in either HeartBleed or our own use of vectors. Rather, making sure the case is covered in unit tests and/or debug builds could save the day. Totally agree. There's no need (or desirability) to check constantly in production code, if you can achieve the same results with proper testing. Solid foundations don't /guarantee /a solid structure, but shaky foundations /always /undermine any structure you try put on top of it. The important thing is to make sure that constant bounds-checking in production code is never /necessary/. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
[opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
LLDynamicArray was dropped in viewer-interesting. What is the replacement for it? Nicky ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Replacement class for LLDynamicArray
Never mind, got guidance from the #opensl On Thursday, May 8, 2014 4:48 PM, Nicky Perian nickyper...@yahoo.com wrote: LLDynamicArray was dropped in viewer-interesting. What is the replacement for it? Nicky ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
