Re: [Factor-talk] Actors on Screen
Hello! 25.11.2016, 22:07, "John Benediktsson": > We have a game vocabulary framework that could be useful for you. I would > think separate threads would be a little less clear than an update method on > all your objects you run every frame or so often. Looks very interesting! Too bad there are no demos. Is Joe Groff available for comments? He seems to be the main author. ---=--- Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Actors on Screen
We have a game vocabulary framework that could be useful for you. I would think separate threads would be a little less clear than an update method on all your objects you run every frame or so often. > On Nov 25, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Alexander Ilinwrote: > > Hello! > > 25.11.2016, 21:27, "John Benediktsson" : >> You can probably use a bunch of models that hold their state/location and >> the UI renders them. Each thread can update the model's value when it >> changes? >> >> What kind of library were you thinking you needed? > > Oh, I dunno. Something someone developed for a simple 2d-game or a > flash-like animation platform. > > Actually, I've no experience in these things, so I wanted to read something > to get the idea how people conceptualize and approach such tasks. > > What I actually need is a way to model and visualize a bunch of robots and a > conveyor line so I can develop a control strategy and work out some > corner-case scenarios. I have a bunch of constraints, and I need to create an > understanding of the way to command the robots for optimal conveyor > throughput. > > In fact, I have a rough understanding of the control algorithm, I just wanted > to see it in motion and work out the details. A rewindable timeline would be > very helpful. > > Any ideas? > > ---=--- > Александр > > -- > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Actors on Screen
Hello! 25.11.2016, 21:27, "John Benediktsson": > You can probably use a bunch of models that hold their state/location and the > UI renders them. Each thread can update the model's value when it changes? > > What kind of library were you thinking you needed? Oh, I dunno. Something someone developed for a simple 2d-game or a flash-like animation platform. Actually, I've no experience in these things, so I wanted to read something to get the idea how people conceptualize and approach such tasks. What I actually need is a way to model and visualize a bunch of robots and a conveyor line so I can develop a control strategy and work out some corner-case scenarios. I have a bunch of constraints, and I need to create an understanding of the way to command the robots for optimal conveyor throughput. In fact, I have a rough understanding of the control algorithm, I just wanted to see it in motion and work out the details. A rewindable timeline would be very helpful. Any ideas? ---=--- Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Actors on Screen
You can probably use a bunch of models that hold their state/location and the UI renders them. Each thread can update the model's value when it changes? What kind of library were you thinking you needed? > On Nov 25, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Alexander Ilinwrote: > > Hello! > > I'd like to have some visual objects moving around the screen with the given > speed and trajectory. > > It would be nice to have all objects be separate threads (active objects, as > they are sometimes known). > > Do we have a vocab to help with that? > > ---=--- > Александр > > -- > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
[Factor-talk] Actors on Screen
Hello! I'd like to have some visual objects moving around the screen with the given speed and trajectory. It would be nice to have all objects be separate threads (active objects, as they are sometimes known). Do we have a vocab to help with that? ---=--- Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
Thank you for the advice, Björn! 25.11.2016, 17:29, "Björn Lindqvist": > It is easiest if you put the builds online somewhere and open an issue > referencing them. Then John and Doug can add them to the dll directory > here: http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/ That the files you have > built are smaller than the existing ones can be good or bad. I've > found that it is often hard to control what dependencies VS will add > to dlls you build. Sometimes it will decide to link to debug libraries > and such. But you can check that with the excellent depends.exe > utility: http://www.dependencywalker.com/ ---=--- Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
It is easiest if you put the builds online somewhere and open an issue referencing them. Then John and Doug can add them to the dll directory here: http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/ That the files you have built are smaller than the existing ones can be good or bad. I've found that it is often hard to control what dependencies VS will add to dlls you build. Sometimes it will decide to link to debug libraries and such. But you can check that with the excellent depends.exe utility: http://www.dependencywalker.com/ 2016-11-25 9:22 GMT+01:00 Alexander Ilin: > Thank you, John, that was very helpful! > >> P.S., I think 32-bit libudis86.dll exists somewhere, and I know 32-bit >> libudis86 is supported on other OS's. > > I have found the sources here: https://github.com/vmt/udis86 > > I happen to have VS2010, so I managed to build both 64- and 32-bit versions > of the DLL, v1.7.2. I can contribute those if you tell me the way. > BTW, for some reason my 64-bit build DLL file is smaller than the one at > http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ > Maybe that's good. > > Anyway, when testing the thing under 32-bit I found an issue, of which I'm > not sure whether it's ours or theirs: > > IN: scratchpad : test2+ ( n -- n ) 2 + ; > IN: scratchpad \ test2+ disassemble > 083c2c10: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax > 083c2c15: 83c604add esi, 0x4 > 083c2c18: c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 ! > This should be > 0x02 > 083c2c1e: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax > 083c2c23: ba2d2c3c08mov edx, 0x83c2c2d (test + 0x1d) > 083c2c28: e903465bffjmp 0x7977230 (+) > 083c2c2d: add [eax], al > 083c2c2f: add [eax], al > 083c2c31: add [eax], al > 083c2c33: add [eax], al > 083c2c35: add [eax], al > 083c2c37: add [eax], al > 083c2c39: add [eax], al > 083c2c3b: add [eax], al > 083c2c3d: add [eax], al > 083c2c3f: 00invalid > > The same issue is present in the 64-bit build of the libudis86.dll > downloaded from http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ > > It can also be reproduced using their command-line client: >> echo a3 00 10 69 07 83 c6 04 c7 06 20 00 00 00 | udcli -x > a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax > 0005 83c604 add esi, 0x4 > 0008 c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 > All three lines of the above output have half-bytes swapped in the mnemonics > (0x20 instead of 0x2, 0x4 instead of 0x40, etc.). > > This begs the question: do we supply bad data to the disassembler, or does > disassembler misinterprets what we give it? > > ---=--- > Александр > > > -- > > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > -- mvh/best regards Björn Lindqvist -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
All things in factor carry their type with them at runtime. For everything but integers, this is done by manipulating pointers to the thing instead and requiring an alignment of the address of the thing. This means that a pointer to this thing will have its lower bits with a value of 0 (the number of bits depends on the alignment. In factor, everything is aligned to 16 bytes, so 4 bits are 0). This is not much of a cost because most things (think tuples, arrays, etc) are bigger then 16 bytes, and you want stuff to be aligned for performance anyway. So since the lower bits always have a value of 0, you can actually put any value in there an just ignore it when following the pointer. For integers only, you don't manipulate pointers, you manipulate the value. When you are doing operations on integers, you need to shift right to get the value (and throw away the tag), do the operation, then shift left and re add the tag. You then notice that if you choose the tag 0 for integers, you don't have to re-add the tag because shifting left inserts zeroes. And you also notice that "( (a >> 4) + (b >> 4) ) << 4" is "a + b" (except when there is an overflow) because of the maths properties (distribution of * to +). So for many operations on integers (like +), you can just do them directly on the tagged (= shifted) integer. Hopefully I didn't make too many mistakes in my explanation, anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong :) Jon On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Alexander Ilinwrote: > Hi! > > I have no idea what integer tagging is, but it's great that there is no > bug. > > To all: I still have the 32-bit buld of the DLL, which I'd like to make > available on the Factor Downloads page. > > 25.11.2016, 11:57, "Jon Harper" : > > Hi, > It's actually the correct data. > All integers are shifted by 4 (hence the 28/60 discussions). The tag of > integers was chosen to be 0 so that some operations (like +) dont' have to > shift before and after. But some operations do have to shift their > arguments to their actual values first. > > If you do : testshift ( n m -- k ) { fixnum fixnum } declare shift ; > you'll see that the second argument is shifted before the shift > instruction is called. > > Or > : test2shift ( n -- n ) 2 shift ; > Should have the correct constant somwhere. > > Le 25 nov. 2016 09:23, "Alexander Ilin" a écrit : > > Thank you, John, that was very helpful! > > > P.S., I think 32-bit libudis86.dll exists somewhere, and I know 32-bit > libudis86 is supported on other OS's. > > I have found the sources here: https://github.com/vmt/udis86 > > I happen to have VS2010, so I managed to build both 64- and 32-bit > versions of the DLL, v1.7.2. I can contribute those if you tell me the way. > BTW, for some reason my 64-bit build DLL file is smaller than the one at > http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ > Maybe that's good. > > Anyway, when testing the thing under 32-bit I found an issue, of which I'm > not sure whether it's ours or theirs: > > IN: scratchpad : test2+ ( n -- n ) 2 + ; > IN: scratchpad \ test2+ disassemble > 083c2c10: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax > 083c2c15: 83c604add esi, 0x4 > 083c2c18: c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 ! > This should be > 0x02 > 083c2c1e: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax > 083c2c23: ba2d2c3c08mov edx, 0x83c2c2d (test + 0x1d) > 083c2c28: e903465bffjmp 0x7977230 (+) > 083c2c2d: add [eax], al > 083c2c2f: add [eax], al > 083c2c31: add [eax], al > 083c2c33: add [eax], al > 083c2c35: add [eax], al > 083c2c37: add [eax], al > 083c2c39: add [eax], al > 083c2c3b: add [eax], al > 083c2c3d: add [eax], al > 083c2c3f: 00invalid > > The same issue is present in the 64-bit build of the libudis86.dll > downloaded from http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ > > It can also be reproduced using their command-line client: > > echo a3 00 10 69 07 83 c6 04 c7 06 20 00 00 00 | udcli -x > a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax > 0005 83c604 add esi, 0x4 > 0008 c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 > All three lines of the above output have half-bytes swapped in the > mnemonics (0x20 instead of 0x2, 0x4 instead of 0x40, etc.). > > This begs the question: do we supply bad data to the disassembler, or does > disassembler misinterprets what we give it? > > ---=--- > Александр > > > > -- > > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > > > , > > > -- > , > > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
Hi! I have no idea what integer tagging is, but it's great that there is no bug. To all: I still have the 32-bit buld of the DLL, which I'd like to make available on the Factor Downloads page. 25.11.2016, 11:57, "Jon Harper":Hi,It's actually the correct data.All integers are shifted by 4 (hence the 28/60 discussions). The tag of integers was chosen to be 0 so that some operations (like +) dont' have to shift before and after. But some operations do have to shift their arguments to their actual values first.If you do : testshift ( n m -- k ) { fixnum fixnum } declare shift ;you'll see that the second argument is shifted before the shift instruction is called.Or: test2shift ( n -- n ) 2 shift ;Should have the correct constant somwhere. Le 25 nov. 2016 09:23, "Alexander Ilin" a écrit :Thank you, John, that was very helpful! > P.S., I think 32-bit libudis86.dll exists somewhere, and I know 32-bit libudis86 is supported on other OS's. I have found the sources here: https://github.com/vmt/udis86 I happen to have VS2010, so I managed to build both 64- and 32-bit versions of the DLL, v1.7.2. I can contribute those if you tell me the way.BTW, for some reason my 64-bit build DLL file is smaller than the one at http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/Maybe that's good. Anyway, when testing the thing under 32-bit I found an issue, of which I'm not sure whether it's ours or theirs: IN: scratchpad : test2+ ( n -- n ) 2 + ;IN: scratchpad \ test2+ disassemble083c2c10: a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax083c2c15: 83c604 add esi, 0x4083c2c18: c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 ! > This should be 0x02083c2c1e: a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax083c2c23: ba2d2c3c08 mov edx, 0x83c2c2d (test + 0x1d)083c2c28: e903465bff jmp 0x7977230 (+)083c2c2d: add [eax], al083c2c2f: add [eax], al083c2c31: add [eax], al083c2c33: add [eax], al083c2c35: add [eax], al083c2c37: add [eax], al083c2c39: add [eax], al083c2c3b: add [eax], al083c2c3d: add [eax], al083c2c3f: 00 invalid The same issue is present in the 64-bit build of the libudis86.dll downloaded from http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ It can also be reproduced using their command-line client:> echo a3 00 10 69 07 83 c6 04 c7 06 20 00 00 00 | udcli -x a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax0005 83c604 add esi, 0x40008 c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20All three lines of the above output have half-bytes swapped in the mnemonics (0x20 instead of 0x2, 0x4 instead of 0x40, etc.). This begs the question: do we supply bad data to the disassembler, or does disassembler misinterprets what we give it? ---=---Александр --___Factor-talk mailing listFactor-talk@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk ,--,___Factor-talk mailing listFactor-talk@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk ---=---Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
Hi, It's actually the correct data. All integers are shifted by 4 (hence the 28/60 discussions). The tag of integers was chosen to be 0 so that some operations (like +) dont' have to shift before and after. But some operations do have to shift their arguments to their actual values first. If you do : testshift ( n m -- k ) { fixnum fixnum } declare shift ; you'll see that the second argument is shifted before the shift instruction is called. Or : test2shift ( n -- n ) 2 shift ; Should have the correct constant somwhere. Le 25 nov. 2016 09:23, "Alexander Ilin"a écrit : Thank you, John, that was very helpful! > P.S., I think 32-bit libudis86.dll exists somewhere, and I know 32-bit libudis86 is supported on other OS's. I have found the sources here: https://github.com/vmt/udis86 I happen to have VS2010, so I managed to build both 64- and 32-bit versions of the DLL, v1.7.2. I can contribute those if you tell me the way. BTW, for some reason my 64-bit build DLL file is smaller than the one at http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ Maybe that's good. Anyway, when testing the thing under 32-bit I found an issue, of which I'm not sure whether it's ours or theirs: IN: scratchpad : test2+ ( n -- n ) 2 + ; IN: scratchpad \ test2+ disassemble 083c2c10: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax 083c2c15: 83c604add esi, 0x4 083c2c18: c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 ! > This should be 0x02 083c2c1e: a300106907mov [0x7691000], eax 083c2c23: ba2d2c3c08mov edx, 0x83c2c2d (test + 0x1d) 083c2c28: e903465bffjmp 0x7977230 (+) 083c2c2d: add [eax], al 083c2c2f: add [eax], al 083c2c31: add [eax], al 083c2c33: add [eax], al 083c2c35: add [eax], al 083c2c37: add [eax], al 083c2c39: add [eax], al 083c2c3b: add [eax], al 083c2c3d: add [eax], al 083c2c3f: 00invalid The same issue is present in the 64-bit build of the libudis86.dll downloaded from http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ It can also be reproduced using their command-line client: > echo a3 00 10 69 07 83 c6 04 c7 06 20 00 00 00 | udcli -x a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax 0005 83c604 add esi, 0x4 0008 c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 All three lines of the above output have half-bytes swapped in the mnemonics (0x20 instead of 0x2, 0x4 instead of 0x40, etc.). This begs the question: do we supply bad data to the disassembler, or does disassembler misinterprets what we give it? ---=--- Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] Libudis86.dll (Was: TYPED: Declarations)
Thank you, John, that was very helpful! > P.S., I think 32-bit libudis86.dll exists somewhere, and I know 32-bit libudis86 is supported on other OS's. I have found the sources here: https://github.com/vmt/udis86 I happen to have VS2010, so I managed to build both 64- and 32-bit versions of the DLL, v1.7.2. I can contribute those if you tell me the way.BTW, for some reason my 64-bit build DLL file is smaller than the one at http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/Maybe that's good. Anyway, when testing the thing under 32-bit I found an issue, of which I'm not sure whether it's ours or theirs: IN: scratchpad : test2+ ( n -- n ) 2 + ;IN: scratchpad \ test2+ disassemble083c2c10: a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax083c2c15: 83c604 add esi, 0x4083c2c18: c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20 ! > This should be 0x02083c2c1e: a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax083c2c23: ba2d2c3c08 mov edx, 0x83c2c2d (test + 0x1d)083c2c28: e903465bff jmp 0x7977230 (+)083c2c2d: add [eax], al083c2c2f: add [eax], al083c2c31: add [eax], al083c2c33: add [eax], al083c2c35: add [eax], al083c2c37: add [eax], al083c2c39: add [eax], al083c2c3b: add [eax], al083c2c3d: add [eax], al083c2c3f: 00 invalid The same issue is present in the 64-bit build of the libudis86.dll downloaded from http://downloads.factorcode.org/dlls/64/ It can also be reproduced using their command-line client:> echo a3 00 10 69 07 83 c6 04 c7 06 20 00 00 00 | udcli -x a300106907 mov [0x7691000], eax0005 83c604 add esi, 0x40008 c7062000 mov dword [esi], 0x20All three lines of the above output have half-bytes swapped in the mnemonics (0x20 instead of 0x2, 0x4 instead of 0x40, etc.). This begs the question: do we supply bad data to the disassembler, or does disassembler misinterprets what we give it? ---=---Александр -- ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk