Am 24.10.2013 um 12:51 schrieb Igor Stasenko <[email protected]>: > > > > On 24 October 2013 08:24, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Am 23.10.2013 um 23:28 schrieb Igor Stasenko <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> >> On 23 October 2013 23:13, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Well implementing ARM-FFI is largely orthogonal to Athens. >>> Yes, i am happily using it for Cairo and it lets me customize /rethink >>> things as they go >>> without need to touch VM. Which means much faster development process and >>> feedback etc. >>> But since Athens API is settled down more or less, now it is quite possible >>> to implement a plugin >>> for different backend, knowing that it won't require huge changes later. >> >> Ok I was not aware you were thinking about that. So this is good to have >> this path in my radar. >> >> Yes, this is actually what we discussed recently with Esteban about possible >> alternatives and >> low-hanging fruits :) >> >>> Concerning ARM: >>> - Damien Pollet works on ARM assembler for ASMJit. >>> as soon as it working, we can try doing something with it. >>> >>> But in addition, what i would like to do is to move more towards >>> platform-neutral FFI implementation, >>> using low-level assembler DSL which is platform neutral. There's a work >>> started on it >>> as part of Mate project, but it is yet far from finished. >> >> I would love that. >> Now I guess that I'm correct to say that even with it the fact that it would >> generate assembly on the fly >> would make it a no go for iPad and friends. >> >> I thought that esteban and you thought about generating the "assembly once >> for all for Ipda and putting it in file" >> so that we do not have the "assembly generation" problem? >> >> that's a big question, whether such idea fits into apple >> technicians/politicans heads or not. >> Do you think we have enough time/resources to waste on implementing such >> mechanism >> only to discover later that Apple says 'over my dead body'? >> The point is that generating code, saving it to file, and then loading that >> file as DLL, >> is largely a hack. >> You either allowed to run your own generated code or not.. because from >> security perspective, >> the fact that you first stored it into file and then load it back doesn't >> changes a tiny bit. > > You store the code in a file in order to rip off the code generation part > from your image. That would make it comply to apples policies. Same goes for > the compiler. You are also not allowed to download a library and use it in > your program. I think the plot is that apps get examined before they are > allowed to be in the appstore. Changing the runtime would break this > certification of the binary and apple would loose control because everybody > would add a clean binary to the examination process and then they would load > everything else when the user opens the app for the first time. So there is > some sense in this. It is just a different way of thinking that we find > annoying. > The sense is that i'm not changing NativeBoost each time i using it, so i am > not "changing the runtime". > It is pure fallacy to consider code as something else than just simple data. > Sure thing, if i mutate the codebase by loading external code from random > source later (and this is what we regularly do with our images) > then the contract is broken. But not in case when all my code and i'm not > changing it in any way. The fact it using code generation doesn't means it > will turn into something else if i don't want to. > It is all about if you have the possibility to change the runtime at runtime or not. If you put native code into a file and remove everything that might change it you have the runtime apple wants. For me this is not philosophical debate so I don’t go into details. I don’t even like coming close to defend the way apple does it. Coming from the system side I just have two hearts beating in my chest. The old one (the security/dark side) tells me you have to restrict everything to be safe. The other/new one tells me: Screw the dark side. We’ll get nowhere with this attitude, let us invent stuff instead of fear stuff.
Norbert > > Norbert > >> From design perspective, it is crutch, which don't really buys anything (why >> on earth, anyone would want to deal with files >> and OS, if he could just run code which already in memory?). >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko.
