25 Nov
2017
25 Nov
'17
3:14 a.m.
The thing is that self-modifying code is pretty much
an artifact of the dawn
of computers, [...]
It's just a Bad Idea.
Surely JIT compiling must count as self-modifying code.
Optimal code for bitblt (raster block transfers) in the Blit
25 Nov
25 Nov
4:16 a.m.
New subject: Harvard and Von Neumann Architectures and Unix
Doug McIlroy writes:
Optimal code for bitblt (raster block transfers) in
the Blit
Oh yeah, forgot about this one. I did a version of this for
the 68020 which was blazingly fast when the generated code
fit into the instruction cache.
Jon
5:17 a.m.
New subject: Harvard and Von Neumann Architectures and Unix
Self modifying code is in your life every day, if you use Linux. There was
a pretty nice talk on it a few years back at ELC.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 8:17 PM Jon Steinhart <jon(a)fourwinds.com> wrote:
Doug McIlroy writes:
Optimal code for bitblt (raster block transfers)
in the Blit
Oh yeah, forgot about this one. I did a version of this for
the 68020 which was blazingly fast when the generated code
fit into the instruction cache.
Jon
2:23 p.m.
New subject: Harvard and Von Neumann Architectures and Unix
Hi Doug,
Surely JIT compiling must count as self-modifying
code.
If it does, then my computer just runs one program from when I turn it
on. It switches memory formats and then is forever extending itself and
throwing chunks away.
_The Story of Mel_ about self-modifying code is well known. What some
that read it a long time ago might not know... Mel has been identified.
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/story-of-mel.html
--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
2343
days inactive
2343
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Doug McIlroy -
Jon Steinhart -
Ralph Corderoy -
ron minnich