On 06 Aug 2012, at 21:06, Rainer Stratmann wrote: > Am Monday 06 August 2012 20:12:41 schrieb Sven Barth: >> The >> problem now is that without knowing the context of a found location >> 0xCA11 you don't know whether it is really a call opcode or some >> immediate data that was passed to some previous opcode. This is also an >> obstacle experienced by VM developers for x86 instructions (or CISC >> instructions in general). For RISC instruction sets this is less >> complex, but the problem exists there as well. > If I have the opcode 0xCA11 and the adress of p1 (suppose) 0x6EF7CAB0 then I > have 6 bytes (0xCA116EF7CAB0). That reduces drastically the possibility of > some immediate random data
It doesn't work like that. Regular calls use relative offsets on most (if not all) architectures we support. And in some cases we generate position-independent code, so then you'll have look at GOT entries to figure out the address. Then there are of course calls via procedure variables. And there's probably a ton more special cases I'm not thinking of right now. >> Out of curiosity: why don't you use resourcestrings? > > It seems that is has not the flexibility and simplicity (in its entirety) > that > I want. I would not call your method "simple" and would also strongly recommend to use resourcestrings instead. Their purpose is exactly to make it easy to translate the strings in a program. Jonas_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
