Lately, I've been studying on the D language. I've always been kind of confused about the runtime.
From the information I can gather about it, (which isn't a whole lot) I understand that it's sort of a, well, runtime that helps with some of D's features. Like garbage collection, it runs along with your own programs. But since D is compiled to machine code, does it really need features such as garbage collection, if our program doesn't need it?
What really confuses me is statements such as:
"You can write an operating system in D."
I know that you can't really do that because there's more to an operating system than any compiled language can give without using some assembly. But if you had a kernel that called D code, would the D runtime prevent D from running in such a bare-bones environment? Or is the D runtime simpler than that? Can it
be thought of as simply an "automatic" inclusion of sourcefile/libraries, that when compiled with your application make no more of a difference than writing that code yourself?
Maybe I'm just looking at it all wrong. But I'm sure some information on the subject could do a lot of people good.
Yes, indeed, you can implement the functions of DRuntime that the compiler expects right in your main module (or wherever), compile without a runtime, and it'll Just Work (tm).
If you just build your code without a runtime, the compiler will emit errors when it's missing a symbol that it expects to be implemented by the runtime. You can then go and look at how DRuntime implements it to see what it does, and then implement it in whatever way you prefer. This is what XOmB, the kernel written in D (language version 1, though, but same deal), does: http://xomb.net/index.php?title=Main_Page
A lot of DRuntime isn't actually used by many applications, but it's the most convenient way to include the runtime components of D into applications, so that's why it's done as a static library (hopefully a shared library in the future).
It's pretty much the same as C and C++ I expect. The language itsself compiles to native code and just runs. But there is some code that is always needed to set everything up to run your program, for example processing command line parameters.
And some more complex language facilities are better implemented by calling some standard code rather than generating the code everywhere it is used. For example throwing an exception needs to find the relevent handler function. No doubt the compiler could insert the code to do there everywhere it was used, but it's much more sensible to write the code in a library and call that. Plus there are many pre-written library functions in the standard library.
All of this taken together is the runtime.
If you write C you can use it to write an operating system because you can write the startup code yourself, you can write all the code for handing memory allocation yourself, you can write all the code for standard functions like strcat yourself instead of using the provided ones in the runtime. But you'd not want to do that for any application program.
Related
I have a long-standing C library used by C and C++ programs.
It has a few compilation units (in other words, C++ source files) that are totally C++, but this has never been a problem. My understanding is that linkers (at least, Linux, Windows, etc.) always work at the file-by-file level so that an object file in a library that isn't referred to, doesn't have any effect on the linking, isn't put in the binary, and so on. The C users of the library never refer to the C++ symbols, and the library doesn't internally, so the resulting linked app is C-only. So while it's always worked perfectly, I don't know if it's because the C++ doesn't make it past the linking stage, or because more deeply, this kind of mixing would always work even if I did mix languages.
For the first time I'm thinking of adding some C++ code to the existing C API's implementation.
For purposes of discussion let us say I have a C function that does something, and logs it via stdout, and since this is buffered separately from cout, the output can become confusing. So let us say this module has an option that can be set to log to cout instead of stdout. (This is a more general question, not merely about getting cout and stdout to cooperate.) The C++ code might or might not run, but the dependencies will definitely be there.
In what way would this impact users of this library? It is widely used so I cannot check with the entire user base, and as it's used for mission-critical apps it'd be unacceptable to make a change that makes links start failing, at least unless I supply a release note explaining the problem and solution.
Just as an example of a possible problem, I know compilers have "hidden" libraries of support functions that are necessary for C and C++ programs. There are obviously also the Standard C and C++ libraries, that normally you don't have to explicitly link to. My concerns are that the compiler might not know to do these things.
I am using C++ (in xcode and code::blocks), I don't know much.
I want to make something compilable during runtime.
for eg:
char prog []={"cout<<"helloworld " ;}
It should compile the contents of prog.
I read a bit about quines , but it didn't help me .
It's sort of possible, but not portably, and not simply.
Basically, you have to write the code out to a file, then
compile it to a dll (invoking the compiler with system), and
then load the dll. The first is simple, the last isn't too
difficult (but will require implementation specific code), but
the middle step can be challenging: obviously, it only works if
the compiler is installed on the system, but you have to find
where it is installed, verify that it is the same version (or
at least a version which generates binary compatible code),
invoke it with the same options that were used when your code
was compiled, and process any errors.
C++ wasn't designed for this. (Compiled languages generally
aren't.)
The short answer is "no, you can't do that". C and C++ were never designed to do this.
That's pretty much also the long answer to the actual question, but I'll expand a bit on a few ideas.
The code, as compiled by the compiler is pretty certainly not trivial to add things to. There are a few techniques that can be used to "add more code" to a program:
Add a dynamic shared library (DLL), which contains code that has been compiled separately to the existing code. You could of course also have code in your program to output some code, compile this code with the compiler, link it into a dynamic library, and load it in your code.
You could build your own little code-generator that generates machine code in a chunk of memory. Note that you probably need to call a "special" memory allocation function, as "normal" memory allocations are typically not allowed to be executed - you need to allocate "with execute permission" - VirtualAlloc in Windows does have such a flag, and mmap in Linux/Unix flavours does too. And of course, you pretty much have to "be a compiler" to achieve this.
You could naturally also invent your own interpreted language, which would allow your program to load in for example a text-file with commands/instructions to be executed, or contain text inside the program for execution with this language.
But like I said to start with, this is not what C and C++ (and most other compiled languages) were meant for, so it's not going to be as simple as "stick some C++ code in a string, and make it run".
It depends why you want to do this.
If it's for efficiency reasons - you know what a function does only at run time, but it has to be very efficient - then what was already suggested (writing to a file, compiling to a dll / so and dynamically loading it) is your best option.
BUT if the reason you want this is to allow for user-input behaviour, say a general function your read from a database (behaviour or a unit ingame? value of a field in a plot?) - or more generally you just want to change / augment behaviour at runtime with little concern for efficiency, I recommend using an outside scripting language like lua, which easily interacts with your compiled C++ code.
The C and C++ languages compile to binary machine code, unlike Java and C# which generate instructions for a 'virtual machine' or interpreted scripting languages such as JavaScript. The compilation of C++ is performed by a separate executable, the compiler, which is not incorporated into the resulting executable.
So the language does not have any built in "eval" capability to translate further code once compilation is finished.
It's not uncommon for new C/C++ programmers to think they need to do this, but they typically don't. Perhaps you could expand further on what you're actually looking to do.
But if you do actually need to be able to do this, your options are:
Write code to compile a new executable with the new code and then run the resulting program.
Write a simple parser and "virtual machine" of your own,
Look at incorporating an embedded scripting/interpreted language such as Lua,
Try and wrap your head around integrating CINT,
See also: Scripting language for C++
I want to know if exists an "evaluate" function in C++ like the Matlab one.
In practise, I need a function that can interprets a string like a command line.
thanks for the answers.
If you are actually trying to "evaluate" C++ source code within a running C++ application, then basically no - it's not a feature specified by the language.
There are interpreters for subsets of C++ (e.g. CInt, Ch and UnderC) - they may be able to run your C++ program if it's a relatively simple one. Alternatively, some can be embedded within a compiled C++ program to allow some run-time source code evaluation, but with limited access to and ability to change the pre-compiled code and its variables.
It's also possible for a running program to invoke the compiler and dynamically load/link a resultant library, but this is a very unusual practice and not without performance, security and interoperability issues:
creating a new process for the compiler, compiling and linking is a relatively resource-hungry and slow operation, but once the library's linked the new code can be executed at normal out-of-line function call speeds
the usual issues with executing an external process
ensuring the path and compiler executable name can't be changed by malicious inputs to the program
that no malware is substituted for or infecting the compiler
on-the-fly source code doesn't contain statements like system(), exec(), unlink() calls, abuse network connectivity, chew unwarranted CPU/memory/descriptors etc.
the pre-compiled C++ program can't be modified or easily/deeply probed by the newly linked code, so the main mechanisms for new behaviour must have been designed in to the pre-compiled application already: expectations for newly accessible variables, functions, and factory methods / virtual dispatch.
If you actually need something more limited, like the ability to evaluate mathematical expressions or logical predicates, possibly expressed in a C++-source style, perhaps reading or setting some of your values, then various more limited and specialised libraries and embedded interpreted are available. There are even libraries for creating such parsers, such as the boost spirit library.
Finally, interpreters for other languages - Lua, Ruby, Python, Perl, TCL etc. - may be embedded in the C++ application, sporting various approaches to interoperability and security.
You can use system(): http://linux.die.net/man/3/system
I'm trying to adjust some mathematical code I've written to allow for arbitrary functions, but I only seem to be able to do so by pre-defining them at compile time, which seems clunky. I'm currently using function pointers, but as far as I can see the same problem would arise with functors. To provide a simplistic example, for forward-difference differentiation the code used is:
double xsquared(double x) {
return x*x;
}
double expx(double x) {
return exp(x);
}
double forward(double x, double h, double (*af)(double)) {
double answer = (af(x+h)-af(x))/h;
return answer;
}
Where either of the first two functions can be passed as the third argument. What I would like to do, however, is pass user input (in valid C++) rather than having to set up the functions beforehand. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Historically the kind of functionality you're asking for has not been available in C++. The usual workaround is to embed an interpreter for a language other than C++ (Lua and Python for example are specifically designed for being integrated into C/C++ apps to allow scripting of them), or to create a new language specific to your application with your own parser, compiler, etc. However, that's changing.
Clang is a new open source compiler that's having its development by Apple that leverages LLVM. Clang is designed from the ground up to be usable not only as a compiler but also as a C++ library that you can embed into your applications. I haven't tried it myself, but you should be able to do what you want with Clang -- you'd link it as a library and ask it to compile code your users input into the application.
You might try checking out how the ClamAV team already did this, so that new virus definitions can be written in C.
As for other compilers, I know that GCC recently added support for plugins. It maybe possible to leverage that to bridge GCC and your app, but because GCC wasn't designed for being used as a library from the beginning it might be more difficult. I'm not aware of any other compilers that have a similar ability.
As C++ is a fully compiled language, you cannot really transform user input into code unless you write your own compiler or interpreter. But in this example, it can be possible to build a simple interpreter for a Domain Specific Language which would be mathematical formulae. All depends on what you want to do.
You could always take the user's input and run it through your compiler, then executing the resulting binary. This of course would have security risks as they could execute any arbitrary code.
Probably easier is to devise a minimalist language that lets users define simple functions, parsing them in C++ to execute the proper code.
The best solution is to use an embedded language like lua or python for this type of task. See e.g. Selecting An Embedded Language for suggestions.
You may use tiny C compiler as library (libtcc).
It allows you to compile arbitrary code in run-time and load it, but it is only works for C not C++.
Generally the only way is following:
Pass the code to compiler and create shared object or DLL
Load this Shared object or DLL
Use function from this shared object.
C++, unlike some other languages like Perl, isn't capable of doing runtime interpretation of itself.
Your only option here would be to allow the user to compile small shared libraries that could be dynamically-loaded by your application at runtime.
Well, there are two things you can do:
Take full advantage of boost/C++0x lambda's and to define functions at runtime.
If only mathematical formula's are needed, libraries like muParser are designed to turn a string into bytecode, which can be seen as defining a function at runtime.
While it seems like a blow off, there are a lot of people out there who have written equation parsers and interpreters for c++ and c, many commercial, many flawed, and all as different as faces in a crowd. One place to start is the college guys writing infix to postfix translators. Some of these systems use paranthetical grouping followed by putting the items on a stack like you would find in the old HP STL library. I spent 30 seconds and found this one:
http://www.speqmath.com/tutorials/expression_parser_cpp/index.html
possible search string:"gcc 'equation parser' infix to postfix"
I have no experience with llvm or clang, yet. From what I read clang is said to be easily embeddable Wikipedia-Clang, however, I did not find any tutorials about how to achieve this. So is it possible to provide the user of a c++ application with scripting-powers by JIT compiling and executing user-defined code at runtime? Would it be possible to call the applications own classes and methods and share objects?
edit: I'd prefer a C-like syntax for the script-languge (or even C++ itself)
I don't know of any tutorial, but there is an example C interpreter in the Clang source that might be helpful. You can find it here: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/examples/clang-interpreter/
You probably won't have much of a choice of syntax for your scripting language if you go this route. Clang only parses C, C++, and Objective C. If you want any variations, you may have your work cut out for you.
I think here's what exactly you described.
http://root.cern.ch/drupal/content/cling
You can use clang as a library to implement JIT compilation as stated by other answers.
Then, you have to load up the compiled module (say, an .so library).
In order to accomplish this, you can use standard dlopen (unix) or LoadLibrary (windows) to load it, then use dlsym (unix) to dynamically reference compiled functions, say a "script" main()-like function whose name is known. Note that for C++ you would have to use mangled symbols.
A portable alternative is e.g. GNU's libltdl.
As an alternative, the "script" may run automatically at load time by implementing module init functions or putting some static code (the constructor of a C++ globally defined object would be called immediately).
The loaded module can directly call anything in the main application. Of course symbols are known at compilation time by using the proper main app's header files.
If you want to easily add C++ "plugins" to your program, and know the component interface a priori (say your main application knows the name and interface of a loaded class from its .h before the module is loaded in memory), after you dynamically load the library the class is available to be used as if it was statically linked. Just be sure you do not try to instantiate a class' object before you dlopen() its module.
Using static code allows to implement nice automatic plugin registration mechanisms too.
I don't know about Clang but you might want to look at Ch:
http://www.softintegration.com/
This is described as an embeddable or stand-alone c/c++ interpreter. There is a Dr. Dobbs article with examples of embedding it here:
http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/212201774
I haven't done more than play with it but it seems to be a stable and mature product. It's commercial, closed-source, but the "standard" version is described as free for both personal and commercial use. However, looking at the license it seems that "commercial" may only include internal company use, not embedding in a product that is then sold or distributed. (I'm not a lawyer, so clearly one should check with SoftIntegration to be certain of the license terms.)
I am not sure that embedding a C or C++ compiler like Clang is a good idea in your case. Because the "script", that is the (C or C++) code fed (at runtime!) can be arbitrary so be able to crash the entire application. You usually don't want faulty user input to be able to crash your application.
Be sure to read What every C programmer should know about undefined behavior because it is relevant and applies to C++ also (including any "C++ script" used by your application). Notice that, unfortunately, a lot of UB don't crash processes (for example a buffer overflow could corrupt some completely unrelated data).
If you want to embed an interpreter, choose something designed for that purpose, like Guile or Lua, and be careful that errors in the script don't crash the entire application. See this answer for a more detailed discussion of interpreter embedding.