New job, new office, new adventures

It’s been roughly 4 weeks since I posted a status report on Amibian.js. I normally keep people up-to-date on facebook (the “Amiga Disrupt” and also “Delphi Developer” groups). It’s been a very hectic month so I fully understand that people are asking. So let’s look at where the project is at and where we are on the time-line.

For those that might not know, I decided to leave Embarcadero a couple of months ago. I will be working out may before I move on. I wanted to write about that myself in a clean fashion, but sadly the news broke on Facebook prematurely.

Long story short, I have been very fortunate to work at Embarcadero. I am not leaving because there is anything wrong or something like that. I was hired as SC for the EMEA regions, which basically made me the support and presenter for most of europe, parts of asia and the middle east. It’s been a great adventure, but ultimately I had to admit that my passion is coding and community work. Sales is a very important part of any company, but it’s not really my cup of tea; my passion has always been research and development.

So, come first of June and I start in a new position at RemObjects. A company that has deep roots with Delphi and C++ builder users – and a company that continues to produce a wealth of high-quality, high-performance frameworks for Delphi and C++ builder. RemObjects also has a strong focus on modern languages, and have a strong portfolio of new and exciting compilers and languages to offer. The Oxygene compiler should be no stranger to Delphi developers, a powerful object-pascal dialect that can target a variety of platforms and chipsets.

Since compiler technology and run-time systems has been my main focus for well over a decade now, I feel RemObjects is a better match.

Quartex Components

Quartex Components has been an officially registered Norwegian company for a while now, so perhaps not news. What is news is that it’s now directly connected with the development of the Quartex Media Desktop (codename “Amibian.js”). While Amibian.js is an open source endeavour, there will be both free and commercial products running on top of that platform. I have written at length about Cloud Forge in the past, so I wont re-hash that again. But 2020 will see a paradigm shift in how teams and companies approach software development.

Company logo professionally milled and on its way to my new office

I will also, once there is more time, continue to sell and support software license components.

Quartex Media Desktop

The “Amibian.js” project is moving along nicely. The deadline is Q4 2019, but im hoping to wrap up the core functionality before that. So we are on track and kicking ass 🙂

More and more elaborate functionality is being implemented for the desktop

Here is an overview of work done this month:

• TSystemService application type has been created (node.js)
  • TApplication now holds IPC functions (inter process communication)
  • Running child processes + sending messages is now simplicity itself
  • Database drivers are 90% done. Delete() and DeleteTable() functionality needs to be implemented in a uniform way
• Authentication is now a separate service
  • Service database layer is finished (using SQLite3 driver by default)
  • Authentication protocol has been designed
  • Server protocol and JSON message envelopes are done
  • Presently working on the client interface
• LDEF bytecode assembler has been improved
  • Faster symbolic lookup
  • Smarter register recognition
  • Early support for stack-frames
  • Fixed bug in parser (comma-list parse)
• QTX framework has seen a lot of work
  • Large parts of the RTL sub-strata has been implemented
  • UTF16 codec implemented
  • QTX versions of common controls:
    • TQTXButton
    • TQTXLabel
    • TQTXToolbar
      • TQTXToolButton
      • TQTXToolSeparator
      • TQTXToolElement
    • TQTXPanel
    • TQTXCheckBox
    • .. and much, much more
• Desktop changes
  • Link Maker functionality has been added
  • Handshake process between desktop and child app now runs on a separate timer, ensuring better conformity and a more robust initialization
  • The Quartex Editor control has been optimized
    • All redraw calls are now synchronized
    • Canvas is created on demand, avoids flicker during initial redraw
    • Support for DEL key + behavior
    • Gutter is now rendered to an offscreen bitmap and blitted into the control’s canvas. The gutter is only fully rendered when cursor forces the view to change

I will continue to keep everyone up to date about the project. As you can understand, its a bit hectic right now so please be patient – it is turning into an EPIC environment!

Understanding a stack

The concept of stacks is an old one, and together with linked-lists and queues – these form the most fundamental programming concepts a developer needs to master.

But, the stack most people use today in languages like object pascal and C++ are not actual stacks; they are more like “conveniently repurposed lists“. Not a huge issue I agree, but the misconception is enough to cause confusion when people dive into low-level programming.

Adventures in assembly-land

It might seem odd to focus on something as trivial as a stack, but I have my reasons. A friend of mine who is a brilliant coder with plenty of large projects behind him recently decided to have a go at assembly coding. He was doing fine and everything was great, until he started pushing and popping  things off the stack.

After a little chat I realized that the problem was not his code, but rather how he viewed the stack. He was used to high-level versions of stacks, which in most cases are just lists storing arbitrary sized data – so he was looking at the stack as a TList<item> expecting similar behavior. Superficially a real-stack and a list-stack work the same if all you do is clean push and pop operations, but the moment you start designing a stack-scheme and push more elaborate constructs (stack-frames), things can go wrong really fast.

The nature of a real stack

A “real” stack that is a part of a hardware SOC (system on a chip) has nothing to do with lists. It’s actually a solid chunk of memory with a register to keep track of an offset into this memory block.

Let’s for sake of argument say you have 4k of stack space right? It’s clean and contains nothing, so the SP (stack pointer, or offset) is zero. What happens when you push something to the stack? for example:

push EDX

The code above simply writes the content of the EDX register to whatever offset the SP contains. It then updates the SP with the size of the data (EDX is a 32bit register, so the SP is incremented by a longword or 4 bytes). In Delphi pseudocode what happens is something like:

var LAddr := FStackBuffer;
inc(LAddr, SP);
PLongword(LAddr)^ := EDX;
inc(SP, SizeOf(EDX));

The thing about a stack is that it doesn’t manage data-length for you. And that is a big difference to remember. It will push or pop data based on the size of the source (in this case the 32bit EDX register) you use.

If you push 1024 bytes of data to a list based stack, the list keeps track of the size and data for you. So when you pop the data from the stack, you get back that data regardless. But a “real” stack couldn’t care less — which is also why it’s so easy to screw up an entire program if you make a mistake.

In short: The length of what you push – must be matched when you pop the data back (!) If you push a longword, you MUST pop a longword later.

Benefits of a real stack

The benefit is that the cost of storing values on a stack is almost zero in terms of cpu operations. A list based stack is more expensive; it will allocate memory for a record-item to hold the information about the data, then it will allocate memory to hold the actual data (depends on the type naturally) and finally copy the data into the newly allocated buffer. Hundreds if not thousands of instructions can be involved here.

A real stack will just write whatever you pushed directly into the stack-memory at whatever offset SP is at. Once written it will add the length of the write to the SP – and that’s it! So it’s one of the oldest and fastest mechanisms for lining up data in a predictable way.

Again the rules are simple: when you pop something off the stack, the size must match whatever you used to push it there. So if you pushed a longword (EDX) you also have to make sure you use a 32-bit target when you pop the value back. If you use RDX, which is 64 bit then you will essentially steal 4 bytes from something else using that stack – and all hell will break loose down the line.

Stack schemes and frames

Im not going to dig too deeply into stack-frames here, but instead write a few words about stack-schemes and using the stack to persist data your code relies on. The lines blur between those two topics anyways.

The SP (stack pointer) is not just a simple offset you can read, you can also write and change it (it also serves as a pointer). You can also read from whatever memory the SP is pointing at without polling any data from the stack.

What language developers usually do, is that they design entire structures on the stack that are, when you get into the nitty-gritty, “offset based records”. For example, lets say you have a record that looks like this:

type
PMyRecord ) ^TMyRecord;
TMyRecord = record
  first: Pointer;
  second: integer;
  Third: array[0..255] of longword;
end;

Instead of allocating conventional ram to hold that record, people push it to the stack and then use offsets to read and update the values there. A bit like a super global variable if you like. This is why when you disassemble code, you find stuff like:

mov EDX, (SP)+4

If the above record was on the stack, that pseudo code would move the field “second” into the EDX register. Because that field is 4 bytes from the stack start (providing SP points to zero).

Every programming language has a stack scheme to keep track of things. Local variables, global variables, class instances, type RTTI — most of these things are allocated in conventional ram – but there is a “program record” on the stack that makes it easy to access that information quickly.

This “moving a whole record onto the stack” is basically what a stack-frame is all about. It used to be a very costly affair with a heavy cpu speed penalty. If you look in your Delphi compiler options you will see that there is a checkbox regarding this very topic. Delphi can be told to avoid stack-frames and do register allocation instead, which was super quick compared to stack-frames – but CPU’s today are largely optimized for stack-frame allocation as default, so I doubt there is much to gain by this in 2019.

Note: A stack frame is much more, but its out of scope for this post. Google it for more info.

To sum up

When doing high-level coding you don’t really need to bother with the nuances between a TStack<item> and a “real” stack. But if you plan on digging deeper and learning a few lines of assembly – learning the differences is imperative. Its boring stuff but as fundamental as wheels on a bicycle. There is no way to avoid it, so might as well jump in.

In its absolute raw form, here is roughly the same functionality for Delphi. This was written on the fly in 2 minutes while on the road, so its purely to give you a rough idea of behavior. I would add a secondary field to keep track of the end (next insertion point), that way SP can be changed without overwriting data on new pushes.

And yes, wrapping this in a TObject utterly defeats the purpose of low-level coding, but hopefully it gives you some idea of the differences 🙂