January 2016 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] gtdebugger in pharo 5.0

by Tudor Girba

Hi, Indeed. See below how it looks like in the latest development version. We have not yet integrate this one because we still need little changes in FastTable to be able to resize columns and not make the column names clickable. Cheers, Doru > On Jan 17, 2016, at 8:07 AM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openInWorld.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Cyril Ferlicot D. > <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> And more, it make the debugger "ventilated" (I don't know if the term >> work in English too). I mean that with more space between the classes >> and the methods it's better for the eye of the user. > > Never heard the term used that way in graphic design, but it makes > perfect sense. > cheers -ben > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "If you can't say why something is relevant, it probably isn't."

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] gtdebugger in pharo 5.0

by Ben Coman

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Cyril Ferlicot D. <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > And more, it make the debugger "ventilated" (I don't know if the term > work in English too). I mean that with more space between the classes > and the methods it's better for the eye of the user. Never heard the term used that way in graphic design, but it makes perfect sense. cheers -ben

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Running processes at startup vs startUpList, which one first?

by Eliot Miranda

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a funny question. Let's say I did: > > [ > something > > ] fork. > > and `something` never finishes and does not get GC. And I have a class > that I registered in startup list. > > Which gets done first? the resume of the above process of the processing > of the startup list? > It depends on two things: a) is the process at a higher, the same or lower priority than the process running the start-up code? Only if it has the same priority is there an issue. If it is higher it will run first. If it is lower it will run last. But if the process had a higher priority and was runnable then it would have prevented the process attempting to snapshot from snapshotting in the first lace. b) if it is the same it will not run until the start up code does a wait or a Processor yield. Snapshot writes the current system state to a file. That includes runnable processes. No magic happens here. The current process *must* have been the process that did the snapshot. The current process *must* have been the highest priority runnable process not waiting to run when the snapshot occurred. Snapshot is *not* equivalent to Processor yield. > Thanks! > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-project] [Vm-dev] Re: Can OSProcess functionality be implemented using FFI instead of plugin?

by Eliot Miranda

Hi Mariano, On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < >> marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Sorry for reviving an old thread but I thought it was better to continue >>> the discussion here because of the context. >>> As you may have read, the other day I released a first approeach to a >>> subset of OSProcess based on FFI (posix_spwan() family of functions): >>> >>> https://github.com/marianopeck/OSSubprocess >>> >>> And with that in mind, I wanted to share a few things with you. The >>> main 2 problems I found with implementing this with FFI was: >>> >>> 1) We have all already agree and discussed that fork+exec cannot be done >>> in separate FFI calls. So at the very min you need either a plugin method >>> that does the fork()+exec() OR wrapping a lib like posix_spwan() >>> >>> 2) The other main problem, is, as you all said (and mostly Nicolas), is >>> the problems with the preprocessor (constants, macros, etc). >>> >>> With all that said, I was able to get my stuff working. However, I am >>> still using some primitives of OSProcess plugin because of 2). >>> >>> I read Eliot idea and what I don't like is the need of a C compiler in >>> the user machine. I think that's a high constrain. Then Igor suggested that >>> WE (developers and maintainers of a certain tool) are the ones that >>> compiles the little C program to extract constant values etc and then WE >>> provide as part of our source code, some packages with some SharedPool >>> depending on the platform/OS. And Igor approach looked a bit better to me. >>> >> >> >> >> You misunderstand the proposal. >> > > I think I did. But let me confirm that below ;) > > >> The C compiler is needed /only when changing the set of constants/, i.e. >> when /developing/ the interface. The C compiler is /not/ needed when >> deploying. >> >> The idea is to >> a) at development time, e.g. when a new variable is added to a SharedPool >> containing platform constants, a C program is autogenerated that outputs in >> some format a description of the names and values of all the constants >> defined in the pool. One convenient notation is e.g. STON. For the >> purposes of this discussion let's assume we're using ston, but any format >> the image an parse (or indeed a shared object the image can load on teh >> current pkatform) will do. The output of the autogenerated C program would >> be called something like <SharedPoolName>.<PlatformName>.ston, e.g. >> UnixConstants.MacOSX64.ston or UnixConstants.Linux32.ston. The ston files >> can easily be parsed by facilities in the Smalltalk image. >> >> b) when deploying the system to a set of platforms one includes all the >> relevant platform-specific ston files. >> >> > OK. But let me ask something. Below you said "be it a plugin or a dll > doesn't matter". To autogenerate the C program, I must know which header > files to include for each platform and probably a few others things. For > example, besides exporting the value, I would also like to export the > sizeof(). At that depends how was the VM compiled, right? So...my > question is...if such a autogenerated C code could be part of the VM > building (considering all the settings being assume when building), cannot > I reuse the knowledge the VM already has? Like which header files > to include, if it was compiled 32 bits or 64 bits, which C compiler to use, > etc.. > I actually said that using text is easier than a dll. So I'm saying autogenerate a C program that outputs name-value pairs in some convenient textual representation, e.g. ston. But answering your question... The knowledge in the VM as to what header files are included *applies only to the include files the VM uses*. The VM uses a subset of the platform. It doesn't for example include any headers that define a database interface. It doesn't include header files that define the interface to a UI tooklit such at GTK. Etc, etc. So in fact the VM *doesn't* include the knowledge one needs to determine the set of include files for an arbitrary FFI interface. And even so, the include files that it does use are in the VM's platform source files, and that information is not readily accessible. Let me summarise. No, the VM cannot be used to determine the set of include files needed to generate constants used in an arbitrary FFI interface. What I mean is if it would be easier if I take the SharedPool at VM > building time, and from there I autogenerate (and run) the C code that > would generate the output. Then, when we "deploy" the VM, we can deploy it > with relevant platform specific ston files as you said. > No. The VM is something that provides an FFI. It doesn't *define* an FFI. One must be able to develop an FFI interface without needing to rebuild the VM. So computing the values of constants should be *separate* from building a VM. Now let me give you more of an example. Let's say we define a subclass of SharedPool called FFISharedPool. FFISharedPool 's job is to manage autogenerating a C file, compiling it for the platform, and organizing parsing the relevant output. Let's say we use a convention like class-side pragmas to define include files, and compiler flags. The VM provides two crucial pieces of information: 1. the platform name 2. the word size One can't run a Mac OS VM on Linux, and one can't run a 64-bit VM on a 32-bit operating system. So taking this information from the VM accurately tells the current system what ABI (application binary interface) to use, and that's what's important in generating the right constants. So we use these two pieces of information to index the method pragmas that tell us what specific files to include. Let's imagine we subclass FFISharedPool to add a shared pool for constants for an SQL database. We might have a class declaration like FFISharedPool subclass: #MYSQLInterface instanceVariableNames: '' classVariableNames: 'MYSQL_DEFAULT_AUTH MYSQL_ENABLE_CLEARTEXT_PLUGIN MYSQL_INIT_COMMAND MYSQL_OPT_BIND MYSQL_OPT_CAN_HANDLE_EXPIRED_PASSWORDS MYSQL_OPT_COMPRESS MYSQL_OPT_CONNECT_ATTR_DELETE MYSQL_OPT_CONNECT_ATTR_RESET' poolDictionaries: '' category: 'MYSQLInterface-Pools' The job of FFISharedPool is to compute the right values for the class variables on every platform we want to deploy the MYSQL interface on. So we need to know the relevant include files and C flags for each platform/word-size combination. A few of them might look like MYSQLInterface class methods for platform information mac32 "I describe the include files and C flags to use when developing a 32-bit MYSQL FFI interface on Mac OS X" <platformName: 'Mac OS' wordSize: 4> <cFlags: #('-m32') includeFiles: #('/opt/mysql/include32')> ^self "all the info is in the pragmas" mac64 "I describe the include files and C flags to use when developing a 64-bit MYSQL FFI interface on Mac OS X" <platformName: 'Mac OS' wordSize: 8> <cFlags: #('-m64') includeFiles: #('/opt/mysql/include64')> The above might cause FFISharedPool to autogenerate files called MYSQLInterface.mac32.c & MYSQLInterface.mac64.c. And these, when run, might output ston notation to MYSQLInterface.mac32.ston & MYSQLInterface.mac64.ston (or maybe to stdout which has to be redirected to MYSQLInterface.mac32.ston; whatever). Now, you might use pragmas, or you might answer a Dictionary instance. What ever style pleases you and seems convenient and readable. But these methods define the necessary metadata (C flags, include paths, and ...?) for FFISharedPool to autogenerate the C program that, when compiled with the supplied C flags and run on the current platform, outputs the values for the constants the shared pool wants to define. You can get fancy and have FFISharedPool autogenerate the C programs whenever one adds or removes a constant name. Or you can require the programmer run something, e.g. MYSQLInterface generateInterfaces. It's really nice if FFISharedPool submits the file to the C compiler automatically, but this can only work for e.g. 32 & 64 bit versions on a single platform. You have to compile the autogenerated program on the relevant platform, with the necessary libraries and include files installed. You could imagine a set of servers for different platforms so one could submit the autogenerated program for compilation and execution on each platform. That's a facility I'd make it easy to implement. I could imagine that a programmer whose company develops an FFI interface and deploys it on a number of platforms would love to be able to automate compiling and running the relevant autogenerated code on a set of servers. I could imagine the Pharo community providing a set of servers upon which lots of software is installed for precisely this purpose. That means that people could develop FFI interfaces without even having to have the C compiler installed on their platform. You could also add a C parser to FFISharedPool that parses the post-preprocessed code and extracts function declarations. But the important thing is autogenerating the C program so that it generates easily parsable output containing the values for the constants. You can extend the system in interesting ways once you ave this core functionality implemented. So once the program is autogenerated and compiled for the current platform, it is run and its output collected in a file whose name can be recognised by FFISharedPool. Now the class side of FFISharedPool might be declared as FFIShardPool class instanceVariableNames: 'platformName wordSize' and on start-up FFIShardPool could examine its subclasses, and for each whose platformName & wordSize do not match the current platform, search for all the matching FOOInterface.plat.ston files, parse them and update the subclasses' variables, and update that pool's platformName & wordSize. It could emit a warning on the Transcript or stdout (headful vs headless) indicating which subclasses it couldn't find the relevant FOOInterface.plat.ston files for. But the end result is that a) providing the system is deployed with FOOInterface.plat.ston files for each interface and platform used, a cross-platform application can be deployed *that does not require a C compiler*. b) providing that a system's FOOInterface files have been initialized on the intended platform, a platform-specific application can be deployed for a single platform *without needing the ston files*. Does this make more sense now? c) at startup the image checks its current platform. If the platform is >> the same that it was saved on, no action is taken. But if the platform as >> changed then the relevant ston file is selected, parsed, and the values for >> the variables in the shared pool updated to reflect the values of the >> current platform. >> >> So the C compiler is only needed when developing the interface, not when >> deploying it. >> >> > OK > > >> >>> Then Nicolas made a point that if we plan to manage all that complexity >>> at the image level it may become a hell too. >>> >>> So.... what if we take a simpler (probably not better) approach and we >>> consider the "c program that exports constants and sizes" a VM Plugin? >>> Let's say we have a UnixPreprocessorPlugin (that would work for OSX, Linux >>> and other's Unix I imagine for the time being) which provides a function >>> (that is exported) which answers an array of arrays. For each constant, we >>> include the name of the constant, the value, and the sizeof(). Then from >>> image side, we simply do one FFI call, we get the large array and we adapt >>> it to a SharedPool or whatever kind of object representing that info. >>> >> >> >> >> This is what I suggestred in teh first place. That what is autogenerated >> is a shared object (be it a plgin or a dll doesn't matter, it is machine >> code generated by a C compiler form an autogenerated C program compiled >> with the platform's C compiler) that can be loaded at run-time and >> interrogated to fetch the values of a set of variables >> > > OK, got it. But still, it would be easier if the "platform" in this case > is the "machine where we build the VM we will then distribute" right? i > mean, I would like to put this in the CI jobs that automatically builds the > VM, and not myself building for each platform. > NO! For example, why would a company that has some proprietary arithmetic package implemented in its secret labs in C or C++ and accessed through the FFI want to have that code on the Pharo community's build servers? > > *I mean, my main doubt is if this job of autogenerating C code, compile > it, run it, export text file, and distribute text file with the VM, could > be done as part of the VM building. * > For fuck's sake. Developing an FFI is not something one does when building a VM. It is something one does wen using the system. f you want to do this you *use a plugin*. The FFI is a different beast. It is to allow programers to interface to external librarys that are *independent from teh VM*. I'm not going to answer this one again. OK? > > > >> . But I think that the textual notation suggested above is simpler. The >> test files are easier to distribute and change. Shared objects and >> plugins have a habit of going stale, and there needs to be metadata in >> there to describe the set of constants etc, which is tricky to generate and >> parse because it is binary (pointer sizes, etc, etc). Instead a simple >> textual format should be much more robust. One could even edit by hand to >> add new constants. It would be easy to make the textual file a versioned >> file. Etc, etc. >> >> > > OK. Got it. And do you think using X Macros for the autogenerated C (from > the SharedPool) is a good idea? > And then I simply write a text file out of it. > > > >> >>> I know that different users will need different constants. But let's say >>> the infrastructure (plugin etc) is already done. And let's say I am a user >>> that I want to build something with FFI and I need some constants that I >>> see are not defined. Then I can simply add the ones I need in the plugin, >>> and next VM release will have those. If Cog gets moved to Github, then this >>> is even easier. Everybody can do a PR with the constants he needs. And in >>> fact, if we have the infrastructure in place, I think that we each of us >>> spend half an hour, we may have almost everything we need. >>> >>> For example, I can add myself all those for signals (to use kill() from >>> FFI), all those from fcntl (to make none blocking pipes), all those from >>> wait()/waitpid() family (so that I can do a waitpid() with WNOHANG), etc >>> etc etc. >>> >>> I know it's not the best approach but it's something that could be done >>> very easily and would allow A LOT of stuff to be moved to FFI just because >>> we have no access to preprocess constants or sizeof() (to know how to >>> allocate). I also know this won't cover macros and other stuff. But still. >>> >>> If you think this is a good idea, I can spend the time to do it. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Nick Ager <nick.ager(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> <snip> >>>> Well, like opendbx, maybe because opengl has quite standard interface... >>>> </snip> >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> It's not that it's not doable, it's that we gonna reinvent gaz plant >>>> and it gonna be so boring... >>>> I'd like to see a proof of concept, even if we restrict to libc, libm, >>>> kernel.dll, msvcrt.dll ... >>>> </snip> >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> Is the unix style select() >>>> ubiquitous or should I use WaitForMultipleObject() on Windows? Are >>>> specification of read/write streams implementation machine independant >>>> (bsd/sysv/others...) >>>> </snip> >>>> >>>> Perhaps *a* way forward is to try to find existing projects which have >>>> already created cross-platform abstractions for platform specific >>>> functionality. Then we can use FFI to access that interface in a similar >>>> way to OpenGL and OpenDBX. For example NodeJs works across unixes - perhaps >>>> they have a useful cross-platform abstraction, boost has abstractions of >>>> IPC etc >>>> >>>> Nick >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano >>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> _,,,^..^,,,_ >> best, Eliot >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-project] [Vm-dev] Re: Can OSProcess functionality be implemented using FFI instead of plugin?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> Sorry for reviving an old thread but I thought it was better to continue >> the discussion here because of the context. >> As you may have read, the other day I released a first approeach to a >> subset of OSProcess based on FFI (posix_spwan() family of functions): >> >> https://github.com/marianopeck/OSSubprocess >> >> And with that in mind, I wanted to share a few things with you. The main >> 2 problems I found with implementing this with FFI was: >> >> 1) We have all already agree and discussed that fork+exec cannot be done >> in separate FFI calls. So at the very min you need either a plugin method >> that does the fork()+exec() OR wrapping a lib like posix_spwan() >> >> 2) The other main problem, is, as you all said (and mostly Nicolas), is >> the problems with the preprocessor (constants, macros, etc). >> >> With all that said, I was able to get my stuff working. However, I am >> still using some primitives of OSProcess plugin because of 2). >> >> I read Eliot idea and what I don't like is the need of a C compiler in >> the user machine. I think that's a high constrain. Then Igor suggested that >> WE (developers and maintainers of a certain tool) are the ones that >> compiles the little C program to extract constant values etc and then WE >> provide as part of our source code, some packages with some SharedPool >> depending on the platform/OS. And Igor approach looked a bit better to me. >> > > > > You misunderstand the proposal. > I think I did. But let me confirm that below ;) > The C compiler is needed /only when changing the set of constants/, i.e. > when /developing/ the interface. The C compiler is /not/ needed when > deploying. > > The idea is to > a) at development time, e.g. when a new variable is added to a SharedPool > containing platform constants, a C program is autogenerated that outputs in > some format a description of the names and values of all the constants > defined in the pool. One convenient notation is e.g. STON. For the > purposes of this discussion let's assume we're using ston, but any format > the image an parse (or indeed a shared object the image can load on teh > current pkatform) will do. The output of the autogenerated C program would > be called something like <SharedPoolName>.<PlatformName>.ston, e.g. > UnixConstants.MacOSX64.ston or UnixConstants.Linux32.ston. The ston files > can easily be parsed by facilities in the Smalltalk image. > > b) when deploying the system to a set of platforms one includes all the > relevant platform-specific ston files. > > OK. But let me ask something. Below you said "be it a plugin or a dll doesn't matter". To autogenerate the C program, I must know which header files to include for each platform and probably a few others things. For example, besides exporting the value, I would also like to export the sizeof(). At that depends how was the VM compiled, right? So...my question is...if such a autogenerated C code could be part of the VM building (considering all the settings being assume when building), cannot I reuse the knowledge the VM already has? Like which header files to include, if it was compiled 32 bits or 64 bits, which C compiler to use, etc.. What I mean is if it would be easier if I take the SharedPool at VM building time, and from there I autogenerate (and run) the C code that would generate the output. Then, when we "deploy" the VM, we can deploy it with relevant platform specific ston files as you said. > c) at startup the image checks its current platform. If the platform is > the same that it was saved on, no action is taken. But if the platform as > changed then the relevant ston file is selected, parsed, and the values for > the variables in the shared pool updated to reflect the values of the > current platform. > > So the C compiler is only needed when developing the interface, not when > deploying it. > > OK > >> Then Nicolas made a point that if we plan to manage all that complexity >> at the image level it may become a hell too. >> >> So.... what if we take a simpler (probably not better) approach and we >> consider the "c program that exports constants and sizes" a VM Plugin? >> Let's say we have a UnixPreprocessorPlugin (that would work for OSX, Linux >> and other's Unix I imagine for the time being) which provides a function >> (that is exported) which answers an array of arrays. For each constant, we >> include the name of the constant, the value, and the sizeof(). Then from >> image side, we simply do one FFI call, we get the large array and we adapt >> it to a SharedPool or whatever kind of object representing that info. >> > > > > This is what I suggestred in teh first place. That what is autogenerated > is a shared object (be it a plgin or a dll doesn't matter, it is machine > code generated by a C compiler form an autogenerated C program compiled > with the platform's C compiler) that can be loaded at run-time and > interrogated to fetch the values of a set of variables > OK, got it. But still, it would be easier if the "platform" in this case is the "machine where we build the VM we will then distribute" right? i mean, I would like to put this in the CI jobs that automatically builds the VM, and not myself building for each platform. *I mean, my main doubt is if this job of autogenerating C code, compile it, run it, export text file, and distribute text file with the VM, could be done as part of the VM building. * > . But I think that the textual notation suggested above is simpler. The > test files are easier to distribute and change. Shared objects and > plugins have a habit of going stale, and there needs to be metadata in > there to describe the set of constants etc, which is tricky to generate and > parse because it is binary (pointer sizes, etc, etc). Instead a simple > textual format should be much more robust. One could even edit by hand to > add new constants. It would be easy to make the textual file a versioned > file. Etc, etc. > > OK. Got it. And do you think using X Macros for the autogenerated C (from the SharedPool) is a good idea? And then I simply write a text file out of it. > >> I know that different users will need different constants. But let's say >> the infrastructure (plugin etc) is already done. And let's say I am a user >> that I want to build something with FFI and I need some constants that I >> see are not defined. Then I can simply add the ones I need in the plugin, >> and next VM release will have those. If Cog gets moved to Github, then this >> is even easier. Everybody can do a PR with the constants he needs. And in >> fact, if we have the infrastructure in place, I think that we each of us >> spend half an hour, we may have almost everything we need. >> >> For example, I can add myself all those for signals (to use kill() from >> FFI), all those from fcntl (to make none blocking pipes), all those from >> wait()/waitpid() family (so that I can do a waitpid() with WNOHANG), etc >> etc etc. >> >> I know it's not the best approach but it's something that could be done >> very easily and would allow A LOT of stuff to be moved to FFI just because >> we have no access to preprocess constants or sizeof() (to know how to >> allocate). I also know this won't cover macros and other stuff. But still. >> >> If you think this is a good idea, I can spend the time to do it. >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Nick Ager <nick.ager(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> <snip> >>> Well, like opendbx, maybe because opengl has quite standard interface... >>> </snip> >>> >>> and >>> >>> <snip> >>> It's not that it's not doable, it's that we gonna reinvent gaz plant >>> and it gonna be so boring... >>> I'd like to see a proof of concept, even if we restrict to libc, libm, >>> kernel.dll, msvcrt.dll ... >>> </snip> >>> >>> <snip> >>> Is the unix style select() >>> ubiquitous or should I use WaitForMultipleObject() on Windows? Are >>> specification of read/write streams implementation machine independant >>> (bsd/sysv/others...) >>> </snip> >>> >>> Perhaps *a* way forward is to try to find existing projects which have >>> already created cross-platform abstractions for platform specific >>> functionality. Then we can use FFI to access that interface in a similar >>> way to OpenGL and OpenDBX. For example NodeJs works across unixes - perhaps >>> they have a useful cross-platform abstraction, boost has abstractions of >>> IPC etc >>> >>> Nick >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> >> > > > -- > _,,,^..^,,,_ > best, Eliot > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-project] [Vm-dev] Re: Can OSProcess functionality be implemented using FFI instead of plugin?

by Eliot Miranda

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves(a)caesar.elte.hu> wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Jan 2016, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > (Still no quote.) > > How will you read the output of the process without having your image's > process blocked in the FFI callout? > How will you make sure that writes to input of the process won't block the > FFI callout? This presupposes the threaded FFI. The threaded FFI allows the VM to make any number of blocking calls, adding a new thread to run the VM whenever the VM is stalled when the heartbeat beats. hence one can freely read and write to/from i/o blocking i/o streams (including pipes and sockets) or blocking database connexions, etc, all without stating that the FFI call must be done in a special way, since all calls through the FFI can block without blocking the VM. Note that the scheme is also amenable to plugins, but the plugins must be rewritten to include the release vm/acquire vm calls around a blocking call. With the threaded VM the FFI includes these calls around every FFI call. HTH _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-project] [Vm-dev] Re: Can OSProcess functionality be implemented using FFI instead of plugin?

by Eliot Miranda

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Sorry for reviving an old thread but I thought it was better to continue > the discussion here because of the context. > As you may have read, the other day I released a first approeach to a > subset of OSProcess based on FFI (posix_spwan() family of functions): > > https://github.com/marianopeck/OSSubprocess > > And with that in mind, I wanted to share a few things with you. The main > 2 problems I found with implementing this with FFI was: > > 1) We have all already agree and discussed that fork+exec cannot be done > in separate FFI calls. So at the very min you need either a plugin method > that does the fork()+exec() OR wrapping a lib like posix_spwan() > > 2) The other main problem, is, as you all said (and mostly Nicolas), is > the problems with the preprocessor (constants, macros, etc). > > With all that said, I was able to get my stuff working. However, I am > still using some primitives of OSProcess plugin because of 2). > > I read Eliot idea and what I don't like is the need of a C compiler in the > user machine. I think that's a high constrain. Then Igor suggested that WE > (developers and maintainers of a certain tool) are the ones that compiles > the little C program to extract constant values etc and then WE provide as > part of our source code, some packages with some SharedPool depending on > the platform/OS. And Igor approach looked a bit better to me. > You misunderstand the proposal. The C compiler is needed /only when changing the set of constants/, i.e. when /developing/ the interface. The C compiler is /not/ needed when deploying. The idea is to a) at development time, e.g. when a new variable is added to a SharedPool containing platform constants, a C program is autogenerated that outputs in some format a description of the names and values of all the constants defined in the pool. One convenient notation is e.g. STON. For the purposes of this discussion let's assume we're using ston, but any format the image an parse (or indeed a shared object the image can load on teh current pkatform) will do. The output of the autogenerated C program would be called something like <SharedPoolName>.<PlatformName>.ston, e.g. UnixConstants.MacOSX64.ston or UnixConstants.Linux32.ston. The ston files can easily be parsed by facilities in the Smalltalk image. b) when deploying the system to a set of platforms one includes all the relevant platform-specific ston files. c) at startup the image checks its current platform. If the platform is the same that it was saved on, no action is taken. But if the platform as changed then the relevant ston file is selected, parsed, and the values for the variables in the shared pool updated to reflect the values of the current platform. So the C compiler is only needed when developing the interface, not when deploying it. > Then Nicolas made a point that if we plan to manage all that complexity at > the image level it may become a hell too. > > So.... what if we take a simpler (probably not better) approach and we > consider the "c program that exports constants and sizes" a VM Plugin? > Let's say we have a UnixPreprocessorPlugin (that would work for OSX, Linux > and other's Unix I imagine for the time being) which provides a function > (that is exported) which answers an array of arrays. For each constant, we > include the name of the constant, the value, and the sizeof(). Then from > image side, we simply do one FFI call, we get the large array and we adapt > it to a SharedPool or whatever kind of object representing that info. > This is what I suggestred in teh first place. That what is autogenerated is a shared object (be it a plgin or a dll doesn't matter, it is machine code generated by a C compiler form an autogenerated C program compiled with the platform's C compiler) that can be loaded at run-time and interrogated to fetch the values of a set of variables. But I think that the textual notation suggested above is simpler. The test files are easier to distribute and change. Shared objects and plugins have a habit of going stale, and there needs to be metadata in there to describe the set of constants etc, which is tricky to generate and parse because it is binary (pointer sizes, etc, etc). Instead a simple textual format should be much more robust. One could even edit by hand to add new constants. It would be easy to make the textual file a versioned file. Etc, etc. > > I know that different users will need different constants. But let's say > the infrastructure (plugin etc) is already done. And let's say I am a user > that I want to build something with FFI and I need some constants that I > see are not defined. Then I can simply add the ones I need in the plugin, > and next VM release will have those. If Cog gets moved to Github, then this > is even easier. Everybody can do a PR with the constants he needs. And in > fact, if we have the infrastructure in place, I think that we each of us > spend half an hour, we may have almost everything we need. > > For example, I can add myself all those for signals (to use kill() from > FFI), all those from fcntl (to make none blocking pipes), all those from > wait()/waitpid() family (so that I can do a waitpid() with WNOHANG), etc > etc etc. > > I know it's not the best approach but it's something that could be done > very easily and would allow A LOT of stuff to be moved to FFI just because > we have no access to preprocess constants or sizeof() (to know how to > allocate). I also know this won't cover macros and other stuff. But still. > > If you think this is a good idea, I can spend the time to do it. > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Nick Ager <nick.ager(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> <snip> >> Well, like opendbx, maybe because opengl has quite standard interface... >> </snip> >> >> and >> >> <snip> >> It's not that it's not doable, it's that we gonna reinvent gaz plant >> and it gonna be so boring... >> I'd like to see a proof of concept, even if we restrict to libc, libm, >> kernel.dll, msvcrt.dll ... >> </snip> >> >> <snip> >> Is the unix style select() >> ubiquitous or should I use WaitForMultipleObject() on Windows? Are >> specification of read/write streams implementation machine independant >> (bsd/sysv/others...) >> </snip> >> >> Perhaps *a* way forward is to try to find existing projects which have >> already created cross-platform abstractions for platform specific >> functionality. Then we can use FFI to access that interface in a similar >> way to OpenGL and OpenDBX. For example NodeJs works across unixes - perhaps >> they have a useful cross-platform abstraction, boost has abstractions of >> IPC etc >> >> Nick >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > -- _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] gtdebugger in pharo 5.0

by Cyril Ferlicot D.

Le 09/01/2016 10:32, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > Could you be specific? What exactly do you find less intuitive? To be able to react, it is useful to get concrete points. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Value is always contextual." > > Hi, After more reflection I find another thing that was, for me, better in the SpecDebugger. The fact that the methods and the classes was in two columns in the stack made the debugger clearer. Most of the time we know the methods and we do not need to check the name of the class. It was easier to check it with the two columns. And more, it make the debugger "ventilated" (I don't know if the term work in English too). I mean that with more space between the classes and the methods it's better for the eye of the user. -- Cyril Ferlicot http://www.synectique.eu 165 Avenue Bretagne Lille 59000 France

Jan. 17, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Color yzw

by Nicolai Hess

2016-01-16 13:46 GMT+01:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>: > > On 16 Jan 2016, at 13:26, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2016-01-16 10:11 GMT+01:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>: > >> >> anyone an idea? >> >> I'm trying to think. >> Looks like it would be good to be able to make a distinction between >> symbols and selectors (selectors installed >> in method dictionaries) >> >> >> yes, this would improve code completion a bit, too, as there are more >> symbols than symbols that are actually names >> of methods. >> >> The data could be created per environment (Smalltalk globals) the first >> time and then cached till shutdown. >> (it would be an array of size 46451, pointing to existing symbols). >> >> The environment could cache sent selectors, tooâ¦ pablo did an experiment >> with that. >> >> Marcus >> >> > How about a new SymbolTable "SelectorTable" that gets new entries on every > method compilation ? > > > maybe better when a method is added to a Method Dictionary? This way even > adding things the strange > way would work... > I tried some methods from TBehavior basicAddSelector:withMethod: but for example Nautilus, directly modifies method dict > > > I hacked a simple experimental version. > But I don't yet understand the workflow for initialisation of the Symbol > class (with rehash, interned, and compacting). > > > If we hook into adding methods, then compactSymbolTable and rehash could > just reset the SelectorTable and fill it after by going over all methodsâ¦ > see attached changesets. load with: DangerousClassNotifier disableDuring:[ String subclass: #Symbol instanceVariableNames: '' classVariableNames: 'NewSymbols OneCharacterSymbols SymbolTable SelectorTable' package: 'Collections-Strings' ]. DangerousClassNotifier disableDuring:[ 'selectortable.1.cs' asFileReference fileIn. ]. Symbol initSelectorTable. 'use_selector_table.cs' asFileReference fileIn. what do you think ? (selectortable.cs defines SelectorTable and some methods in Symbol and String) (use_selector_table adds selectors as internedSelectorSymbol if this selector is set as a selector on CompiledMethod and uses findInternedSelector .... in RubStyler visitMessageNode) > > > Marcus > >

Jan. 16, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Unable to read Utf8 ?

by Eliot Miranda

Hi Esteban, > On Jan 16, 2016, at 2:51 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 16 Jan 2016, at 11:39, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On 16 Jan 2016, at 10:45, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi Thierry, >>> >>> up until a few hours ago the latest VM sources were indeed broken by work I was doing on 64 bits. My sources are AFAIA now correct and I suppose you're waiting on Esteban doing a merge. But I'm responding since there seems to be a process error here. >> >> is still broken :) > > btwâ¦ Iâm not merging anymore VMMaker packages, they are taken and built âas isâ (I worked a lot to get back to this, heh) :) > this is what âlatestâ vm is. And I think this is the right thing to do. Can I get a stream of email from the ci build/test server which shows whether the VM is good or not? > what happens is that time to time I still have to merge platform sourcesâ¦ but I made that Thursday so we are ok (just verified). > > Anyway, it is still broken :( I'm working on it :) >>> I need the freedom to break the VM, otherwise I can only extend it with difficulty. This assumes that there are currently servers that build and test the VM, and implies that we maintain the notion of the most recent good VM that has passed all the tests, and that this is the "latest" VM everyone is using. >>> >>> If there isn't this distinction then every time I extend the VM and make inevitable mistakes I affect users. That's clearly not sensible. >> >> yes of course, what we have is two versions of the VM: >> >> - âlatest" build is a build with latest sourcesâ¦ this might be broken. People willing to help us find bugs should use this. >> - âstableâ build is the VM after it passed all testsâ¦ and thatâs what people willing some stability should use :) >> >> what actually is happening now is that there is a lot of people helping in the migration of spur (something I thank, a lot) and then they use latest vm versionâ¦ who is usually very stable (but not always, as is the case). >> >> cheers, >> Esteban >> >> >>> >>> _,,,^..^,,,_ (phone) >>> >>>> On Jan 16, 2016, at 1:21 AM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Guys, >>>> >>>> has something changed in string handling? I'm unable to get the latest Pharo to read files containing utf8 data. >>>> >>>> I tracked it down to a primitive (at:put:) in WideString and to the latest vm for Pharo 5, so, maybe there is something wrong in the latest vm. >>>> >>>> Thierry >

Jan. 16, 2016