Steve Fan --
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 7:14 PM Steve Fan <stevefan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I’m sorry to intervene in the matter, but as you look at the design of
> TCC, you will see that it is not designed for re-entrancy.
>
yes. i understand. i am not trying to make it reentrant. i want to
hot-recompile-swap a function with very low latency and i am willing to
settle for a hack.
Foolish younger me, I used to have a hardworking re-entrant fork of TCC
> working but the one of the project owner denounced my idea, calling me to
> adapt TLS for each and every global variables instead of rewriting most of
> the TCC functions to add TCCState for them.
>
good for you.. and that sucks.
TCC is just a hobbyist bone picked from OTCC by the legend Fabrice Bellard
> himself, but he has abandoned his child, TCC, ever since.
>
>
yes. i get that.
I used to be like you, I want to research on TCC, but now I do warn you to
> not touch this egregious code again.
>
i am not aiming to change the TCC source code. i actually only want to hack
around what currently exists. that said, i might end up helping out somehow.
Go figure out your own parser. Maybe learn Bison or ANTLR for a basic
> parser, then read some paper about register allocation (which is a very
> bitchy problem for it was actually NP-Complete), read the specs for ELF,
> and read the respective assembly handbook for each and every codegen
> backend. You can reuse the ELF/PE code from TCC I reckon, but
>
thank you. this is good advice and good info. i know parsing and grammars.
i write my grammars/parsers in perl6 :)
maybe generating x86, ARM, or LLVM-IR is not that hard and i should go do
that. (right now it is black magic to me.)
but my aim is actually to hack something together to further my aims in a
different domain: sound.
i am quite close with TCC.
> just don’t try to make anything happen to TCC, a dying project.
>
i hear your warning. you may very well be right, but to me TCC seems...
mature, not dying. maybe it's not going to be much more than what it is,
but i bet it'll hold its value for a while.
-- karl
>
>
> *From: *Karl Yerkes <karl.yer...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, 21 June 2019 9:24 AM
> *To: *tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> *Subject: *Re: [Tinycc-devel] Two compilers at once
>
>
>
> thank you for your replies. your help and insights are much appreciated.
>
>
>
> I'm loving TCC!
>
>
>
> however, i've reached the limit of my current hot-swap function hack that
> uses two state-commingling TCC instances. after a while, the instances stop
> working properly and I get strange compile errors.
>
>
>
> so, i am interested in executing some hack to allow multiple independent
> TCC instances in the same application. i am certain that "the old trick
> of just opening a pipe, forking and
>
> then sending back the result" will not work for my purposes. if i can't
> get one of these hacks working, i have to go look at LLVM and cling again :/
>
>
>
> as i understand it, option 2 (from Giovanni Mascellani) is using libtcc
> to compile libtcc from source into memory. that sounds awesome. i spent
> most of today trying this on windows.. and also learning to compile TCC on
> windows. here's my attempt:
>
>
>
> // boot.cpp
> //
> // tcc version 0.9.27 (x86_64 Windows)
> // install: c:/tcc
> // include:
> // c:/tcc/include
> // c:/tcc/include/winapi
> // libraries:
> // c:/tcc/lib
> // C:/Windows/system32
> // libtcc1:
> // c:/tcc/lib/libtcc1-64.a
> //
> // build and run with:
> // cd tinycc
> // cl /MD boot.cpp c:\tcc\libtcc64.lib
> // boot.exe
> //
> // fails like this:
> // need 457827 bytes
> // relocating to 21f0a402fd0
> // tcc: error: library 'libtcc1-64.a' not found
> // Assertion failed: dec != nullptr, file boot.cpp, line 69
> //
> #include "libtcc.h"
>
> #include <cassert>
> #include <iostream>
>
> int main() {
> TCCState* instance = tcc_new();
>
> // i'm on Windows 10 x64. what else do i need here?
> tcc_set_options(instance, "-shared");
> tcc_define_symbol(instance, "TCC_TARGET_X86_64", "");
> tcc_define_symbol(instance, "TCC_TARGET_PE", "");
> tcc_define_symbol(instance, "LIBTCC_AS_DLL", "");
>
> // i needed this define on Windows to get tcc_relocate in the DLL
> tcc_define_symbol(instance, "TCC_IS_NATIVE", "");
>
> tcc_set_output_type(instance, TCC_OUTPUT_MEMORY);
>
> // maybe add more source files?
> tcc_add_file(instance, "libtcc.c");
>
> int size = tcc_relocate(instance, (void*)0);
> void* memory = malloc(size);
>
> printf("need %d bytes\n", size);
> printf("relocating to %llx\n", (unsigned long long int)memory);
> tcc_relocate(instance, memory);
>
> // TCCState *tcc_new(void);
> using New = TCCState* (*)(void);
> New _new = (New)tcc_get_symbol(instance, "tcc_new");
> assert(_new != nullptr);
>
> // int tcc_set_output_type(TCCState *s, int output_type);
> using SetOutputType = int (*)(TCCState*, int);
> SetOutputType _set_output_type =
> (SetOutputType)tcc_get_symbol(instance, "tcc_set_output_type");
> assert(_set_output_type != nullptr);
>
> // int tcc_compile_string(TCCState *s, const char *buf);
> using CompileString = int (*)(TCCState*, const char*);
> CompileString _compile_string =
> (CompileString)tcc_get_symbol(instance, "tcc_compile_string");
> assert(_compile_string != nullptr);
>
> // int tcc_relocate(TCCState *s1, void *ptr);
> using Relocate = int (*)(TCCState*, void*);
> Relocate _relocate = (Relocate)tcc_get_symbol(instance, "tcc_relocate");
> assert(_relocate != nullptr);
>
> // void *tcc_get_symbol(TCCState *s, const char *name);
> using GetSymbol = void* (*)(TCCState*, const char*);
> GetSymbol _get_symbol = (GetSymbol)tcc_get_symbol(instance,
> "tcc_get_symbol");
> assert(_get_symbol != nullptr);
>
> // can i delete the instance now??
> // my experiments suggest no.
> // tcc_delete(instance);
>
> // use the new, relocated instance to compile something
> TCCState* born_in_memory = _new();
> assert(born_in_memory != nullptr);
> _set_output_type(born_in_memory, TCC_OUTPUT_MEMORY);
> _compile_string(born_in_memory, "int dec(int t) { return t - 1; }");
> _relocate(born_in_memory, TCC_RELOCATE_AUTO);
> using Foo = int (*)(int);
> Foo dec = (Foo)_get_symbol(born_in_memory, "dec");
> assert(dec != nullptr);
> printf("dec(2) == %d\b", dec(2));
> }
>
>
>
> am i on the right track here? any suggestions would help a lot. i think i
> could add the path to libtcc1-64.a, but i would rather compile all the .c
> files i need so there's no need to find libtcc1-64.a at runtime.
>
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> option 1 (from Christian Jullien) is something that i don't quite
> understand. i am just failing to connect the dots given i the pseudocode:
>
>
>
> // tcc1.cpp:
> namespace tcc1 {
> #include "libtcc.h"
>
> // does this mean i should compile libtcc as c++ (not c) under the tcc1
> namespace?
> };
>
> // tcc2.cpp:
> namespace tcc2 {
> #include "libtcc.h"
>
> // does this mean i should compile libtcc as c++ (not c) AGAIN under
> the tcc2 namespace?
>
> // OR does this mean i should write a wrapper interface for libtcc here?
> };
>
> // main.cpp:
> int main() {
> tcc1::TCCState* a = nullptr;
> char (*A)(int) = nullptr;
> assert((a = tcc1::tcc_new()) != nullptr);
> tcc2::TCCState* b =
> tcc2::tcc_new(); // remove this line to make the program work
> }
>
> also "But it may not be so simple. For some projects it worked flawlessly
> and failed for some others" is mysterious to me. my apologies for being too
> ignorant to put it together! a little more help on this option might help
> me a lot.
>
>
>
> sorry for the long email.
>
>
>
> -- karl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:30 AM Giovanni Mascellani <
> g.mascell...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Il 25/05/19 06:24, Christian Jullien ha scritto:
> > Because Karl uses C++11, it may be /theoretically/ possible for him to
> > load two different tcc instances having different C++ namespaces and
> > compiled in two distinct translation units.
>
> If you don't mind some quite dirty hacking (and if you mind it you
> shouldn't probably use tcc), I also believe that you can have two
> instances in the same address space by using the first one to compile
> another one (or many others) and relocating them to different addresses.
> Then each of them is a completely independent compiler with independent
> state. Of course this means that you need tcc's source code at runtime.
> Otherwise there is the old trick of just opening a pipe, forking and
> then sending back the result.
>
> Have fun, Giovanni.
> --
> Giovanni Mascellani <g.mascell...@gmail.com>
> Postdoc researcher - Université Libre de Bruxelles
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
