Re:Harvey – An effort to provide a modern, distributed, 64-b...
by tome on Saturday December 23, 2017 @05:06AM
(#15993631)
It's not outside the compiler's scope at all. See for example http://www.clash-lang.org/.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Harvey – An effort to provide a modern, distributed, 64-b...
by jstewartmobile on Saturday December 23, 2017 @07:26AM
(#15993939)
How does an HDL address the limitation of software compilers at the software-hardware boundary?
By scope, I mean that the compiler can really only see as far as the source code it is compiling. In something like an OS--especially a non-microkernel--an awful lot ends up having to be read and written across the boundary, and in an unsafe context.
Re:Harvey – An effort to provide a modern, distributed, 64-b...
by tome on Sunday December 24, 2017 @07:08AM
(#15999204)
Oh I see. You were talking about a compiler for software talking to hardware. Well, I don't see why talking to hardware is any different to talking to a CPU or main memory or a disk.
Re:Harvey – An effort to provide a modern, distributed, 64-b...
by jstewartmobile on Sunday December 24, 2017 @09:09AM
(#15999582)
Not so much "talking" as directly reading/writing memory outside of your source scope that is also mutated by other chips--like a DMA buffer.
Or for a traditional kernel, reading/writing directly into the address space of a user process. Wouldn't have to worry so much about race conditions there since the process could be suspended, but there is still an opportunity to fudge the indexing.