Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1089
| Path | csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end |
|---|---|
| From | Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level |
| Date | Mon, 10 Feb 2014 20:45:46 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 32 |
| Sender | news@iecc.com |
| Approved | comp.compilers@iecc.com |
| Message-ID | <14-02-010@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <14-02-007@comp.compilers> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | news.iecc.com |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | miucha.iecc.com 1392097334 64330 64.57.183.58 (11 Feb 2014 05:42:14 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@iecc.com |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:42:14 +0000 (UTC) |
| Keywords | design, debug |
| Posted-Date | 11 Feb 2014 00:42:14 EST |
| X-submission-address | compilers@iecc.com |
| X-moderator-address | compilers-request@iecc.com |
| X-FAQ-and-archives | http://compilers.iecc.com |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.compilers:1089 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 2/10/2014 9:11 AM, seimarao@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > Its been a long time since Java & .Net introduced safe address > types to the computing world. > > My question is have we settled on what could be a proper representation > for safe pointers ? > > Some Mainframes like the 390 have historically supported safe pointers, > I remember. > > Sincerely, > Seima Rao. > [I looked at my S/390 Principles of Operation, and I see a bunch of stuff > for tracing, but nothing that looks like safe pointers. I'd think it was > hardware dependent, e.g., if a machine has a fairly clean and efficient > trap for an unmapped zero address, you'd use that, but if it doesn't, you'd > do something else. -John] > I'm an architect on the team doing the Mill CPU architecture (ootbcomp.com/docs). We would love to do a full-blown capability system, but regretfully have decided that's not viable as a commercial product. A safe pointer (cap) is more than 64 bits, and people would refuse to repeat the pain of the 32- to 64-bit migration. And most programs violate safety (and language standards, but that's another issue), and it's hard to make a sale when the customers keep saying "It worked on Intel!". Sad.
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level seimarao@gmail.com - 2014-02-10 09:11 -0800 Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) - 2014-02-11 00:58 +0000 Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-02-11 01:03 +0000 Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com> - 2014-02-10 20:45 -0800 Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level wclodius@earthlink.net (William Clodius) - 2014-02-10 23:03 -0700
csiph-web