binaryen
Oberon
Our great sponsors
binaryen | Oberon | |
---|---|---|
14 | 76 | |
7,099 | 423 | |
1.7% | - | |
9.8 | 7.4 | |
7 days ago | about 1 month ago | |
WebAssembly | C++ | |
Apache License 2.0 | GNU General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
binaryen
-
Bring garbage collected programming languages efficiently to WebAssembly
The Binaryen wasm optimizer (mentioned in the article) is always open for contributions,
https://github.com/WebAssembly/binaryen
-
Random Testing of WebAssembly Implementations Using Semantically Valid Programs
The end of the related work section cites both wasm-smith and the Binaryen fuzzer (https://github.com/WebAssembly/binaryen/wiki/Fuzzing) and says, "They both provide a fuzzer that turns a stream of bytes into a WebAssembly module in order to test implementations. Their fuzzers always generate semantically valid test cases, but lack the targeting and tuning that Xsmith provides."
I look forward to reading more about how they do the targeting and tuning.
-
Web assembly book?
Binaryen or the LLVM of wasm: https://github.com/WebAssembly/binaryen
-
You can reduce web build file size by 4mb by using Binaryen
Download Binaryen
-
What's the best way to generate WASM programmatically?
Probably https://github.com/WebAssembly/binaryen/, there were various rust bindings to it.
-
Build a WebAssembly Language for Fun and Profit: Code Generation
The final phase of our compiler is code generation. This phase takes the AST and converts it to a set of executable instructions. In our case, WebAssembly. To accomplish this, we are going to use a popular WebAssembly compiler toolchain called binaryen.
-
Build a WebAssembly Language for Fun and Profit: Lexing
In this guide, we will be using TypeScript and NodeJS. The concepts are highly portable, so feel free to use the environment you're most comfortable with. Our only major dependency, binaryen, has a simple C API. You are welcome to skip ahead to the next section if you're using a different language.
-
Rust and WebAssembly without a Bundler
What are the size and performance benefits of processing the Wasm payload with wasm-opt?
-
Is WebAssembly Text (WAT) Just Another IR?
I would recommend looking into binaryen as it has it's own IR and can perform optimizations over it. It's also simpler than LLVM and has the option to produce binaries with debug names.
-
What are the advantages or disadvantages of compiling to VM Bytecode vs native machine code?
You can also use binaryen to optimize your wasm output
Oberon
-
Boehm Garbage Collector
> Sure there's a small overhead to smart pointers
Not so small, and it has the potential to significantly speed down an application when not used wisely. Here are e.g. some measurements where the programmer used C++11 and did everything with smart pointers: https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet/issues/80#issuecomm.... There was a speed down between factor 2 and 10 compared with the C++98 implementation. Also remember that smart pointers create memory leaks when used with circular references, and there is an additional memory allocation involved with each smart pointer.
> Garbage collection has an overhead too of course
The Boehm GC is surprisingly efficient. See e.g. these measurements: https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcase.... The same benchmark suite as above is compared with different versions of Mono (using the generational GC) and the C code (using Boehm GC) generated with my Oberon compiler. The latter only is 20% slower than the native C++98 version, and still twice as fast as Mono 5.
-
Niklaus Wirth, or the Importance of Being Simple
Great, thanks!
There are books online for free, e.g.
https://people.inf.ethz.ch/wirth/ProgInOberonWR.pdf
and https://ssw.jku.at/Research/Books/Oberon2.pdf
Oberon+ is a superset of Oberon 90 and Oberon-2. Here is more information: https://oberon-lang.github.io/, and here is the current language specification: https://github.com/oberon-lang/specification/blob/master/The.... I already had valuable feedback here on HN concerning the channel extensions. Further research brought me to the conclusion, that Oberon+ should support both, channels and also monitors, because even in Go, the sync package primitives are used twice as much as channels. Mutexes and condition variables can be emulated with channels (I tried my luck here: https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-emulate-mutexes-and-conditi...), but for efficiency reasons I think monitors should be directly supported in the language as well, even if it might collide with the goal of simplicity.
Feel free to comment here or e.g. in https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/discussions/45.
-
Tex-Oberon: Make Project Oberon Pretty Again
> Does anyone know why Wirth never modernized his style?
Readability. It's easier to read the source code with uppercase keywords. (I think Wirth once said that code is written once but read many times). See this source code - https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rochus-keller/OberonSystem... - to get an idea of this (the uppercase keywords allow you to easily scan the blocks of code). Ofcourse, one can claim that the same can be achieved better today with colour-coded keywords.
If I remember right, the Oberon+ IDE - https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon - gives you an option to disable this and use lowercase keywords.
- FreeOberon cross-platform Oberon language IDD
-
Project Oberon (New Edition 2013)
> gain a deep understanding of it .. generate smaller subsets of the system
You can use the OberonViewer for this purpose with the original source code, or the Oberon IDE with a version of the Project Oberon System which runs with SDL on all platforms, see https://github.com/rochus-keller/oberon/#binary-versions and https://github.com/rochus-keller/OberonSystem/tree/FFI
-
KolibriOS on Single Floppy Disk
> Regardless, which one is more likely to be ported to a different architecture in the future?
Not sure I understand the question. I'm talking about CPU architectures. The current implementation is in x86 assembler. So if you want to run it on AMD64 or ARM, then you have to replace all assembler files, in the present case probable the full source code.
> what are the comparative performance benchmarks of the low-level language versus the high-level language?
I don't have any measurements. But consider that many operating systems are implemented in C (e.g. Linux) with only isolated parts in assembler, so it is easier to port to other architectures. Linux apparently is fast enough and available for nearly every CPU. Oberon in contrast to C is garbage collected, which also affects performance. I have measurements comparing the same benchmark suite implemented in C++ and in Oberon, where the former is about 22% faster (see https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcase...).
- Why Use Pascal?
-
C or LLVM for a fast backend?
I actually had a similar problem some years ago and finally moved away from LLVM because of complexity, continuous research effort and performance. My current Oberon+ implementation works like this: the CIL code generator together with Mono is used during development, integrated with the IDE, using the debugging features integrated in Mono; to deploy the application and to gain another factor 2 of performance C99 instead of CIL can be generated and compiled with any compatible toolchain. Here are some performance measurements: https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcases/Are-we-fast-yet/Are-we-fast-yet_results_linux.pdf. Compiling to CIL is very fast and the time Mono needs to compile and run is barely noticable.
- Do transpilers just use a lot of string manipulation and concatenation to output the target language?
-
Native AOT Overview
> annoying aspects was requiring the .NET runtime ... OpenJDK is a blessed implementation in a way that Mono never was
Which is unjustified, because Mono CLR is just a single executable less than 5 MB which you can download and run without a complicated installation process (see e.g. https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/#binary-versions ). AOT compilation on the other hand is a huge and complex installation depending on a lot of stuff including LLVM, and the resulting executables are not really smaller than the CLR + mscorlib + app.
What are some alternatives?
wasm-bindgen - Facilitating high-level interactions between Wasm modules and JavaScript
oberon-riscv - Oberon RISC-V port, based on Samuel Falvo's RISC-V compiler and Peter de Wachter's Project Norebo. Part of an academic project to evaluate Project Oberon on RISC-V.
wasi-sdk - WASI-enabled WebAssembly C/C++ toolchain
MoarVM - A VM with adaptive optimization and JIT compilation, built for Rakudo
wasi-libc - WASI libc implementation for WebAssembly
Smalltalk - Parser, code model, interpreter and navigable browser for the original Xerox Smalltalk-80 v2 sources and virtual image file
EasyOCR - Ready-to-use OCR with 80+ supported languages and all popular writing scripts including Latin, Chinese, Arabic, Devanagari, Cyrillic and etc.
tectonic - A modernized, complete, self-contained TeX/LaTeX engine, powered by XeTeX and TeXLive.
asyncify - Standalone Asyncify helper for Binaryen
aws-lambda-rust-runtime - A Rust runtime for AWS Lambda
workers-wasi
atldotnet - Fully managed, portable and easy-to-use C# library to read and edit audio data and metadata (tags) from various audio formats, playlists and CUE sheets