Long put short: The teacher who taught me through out the last year has only recently left and has been replaced with a new one. This new teacher has given me an assignment that involves things (like this) that we were never previously taught. So this task has showed up on the assignment and I have no idea how to do it. I can't get hold of the teacher because he's poorly and not coming in for the next few days. And even when I do ask him to explain further, he gets into a right mood and makes me feel like I'm completely retarded.
Describe how the hardware platform impacts upon the choice for
the programming language
Looking at my activity here on SO, you can tell that I'm into programming, I'm into developing things, and I'm into learning, so I'm not just trying to get one of you guys to do my homework for me.
Could someone here please explain how I would answer a question like this.
Some considerations below, but not a full answer by any means.
If your hardware platform is a small embedded device of some kind, then your choice of programming language is going to be directed towards the lower level unmanaged languages - you probably won't be able to (or want to) load a managed language runtime like the Java JVM or .NET CLR. This is down to memory and storage requirements. Similarly, interpreted languages will be out of the question as you won't have space for the intepreter.
If you're on a larger machine, it's more a question of compatibility. A managed language must run on a platform where its runtime is supported. In the case of .NET, that's Windows, or other platforms if you substitute the Microsoft CLR with the Mono runtime. In the case of Java, that's a far wider range of platforms.
This is by no means a definitive answer, but my first thought would be embedded systems. A task I perform on an embedded system, or other low powered battery operated computer, would need to be handled completely different to that performed on a computer which has access to mains electricity.
One simple impact.. would be battery life.
If I use wasteful algorithms on an embedded system, the battery life will be affected.
Hope that helps stir the brain juices!
Clearly, the speed and amount of memory of the device will impact the choice. The more primitive and weak the platform is, the harder it is to run code developed with very high level languages. Code written with them may just not work at all (e.g. when there isn't enough memory) or be too slow or it will require serious optimizations (i.e. incur more work), perhaps affecting negatively the feature set or quality.
Also, some languages and software may rely heavily on or benefit from the availability of page translation in the CPU. If the CPU doesn't have it, certain checks will have to be done in software instead of being done automatically in hardware, and that will affect the performance or the language/software choice.
Related
I am trying to gain a more holistic, general, and high-level understanding of programs and programming languages.
I would like to understand how they actually function. I understand at the lowest level is machine code which is 0 and 1s. Then you have assembly. Then you have another high level language where every instruction/function/method/call/routine whatever you want to call it maps to some instruction or group of instructions in assembly right? The higher level language cannot provide or do anything outside of what the lower level language assembly provides correct?
Similarly, since all code runs on an OS, that code can only do things that the OS provides. It is impossible for the code to do anything outside of what the OS actually provides correct?
The computer has an instruction set, machine code, which defines what can be done on the computer. Assembly code is essentially a more convenient representation of that, so assembly code can do anything the machine can do. A higher-level programming language has to run on the machine, so it can't do anything the machine can't do, though it may well be able to express it more conveniently (e.g. print "foo" rather than several dozen machine-code instructions). It is a matter of implementation choice whether the compiler for that programming language generates machine code directly, or assembly code, or any other form that might need further processing.
This brings us to the question of whether it's possible for a program (regardless of what it's written in) to do something the OS does not explicitly provide for. I find this an odd way to express it, since the point of writing a program is to give you some capability that you didn't have before, so in some sense you only write programs for things the OS does not explicitly provide you with. The problem lies in defining what the OS "provides". If it's a general-purpose OS, then its designers likely intend to "provide" the ability for you to write a wide range of programs. The OS may choose to provide some convenient feature (say, the ability to create files) but if it did not provide such a feature, you could perhaps do it yourself, given suitable motivation (and, for the file creation example, the ability to do disk I/O - possibly requiring you to write a disk driver too).
I am trying to gain a more holistic, general, and high-level
understanding of programs and programming languages.
I would like to understand how they actually function.
I recommend working through the understanding of modern hardware to get good performance and energy efficiency with the following as example:
With subword parallelism to improve matrix multiply by a factor of 4.
Doubling the performance by unrolling the loop to demonstrate the value of instruction level parallelism.
Doubling performance again by optimizing for caches using
blocking.
Finally, A speedup of 14 from 16 processors by using thread-level parallelism.
All four optimizations in total add just 24 lines of C code to a matrix multiply example you find in
Computer Organization and Design: The Hardware Software Interface (5th ed.)
or similar books.
To make a point, it really is worth it to dig deeper than just "learning python" even if it is a good start. So understanding low level really effects high level programming in many ways and thats what you are after according to your question.
There is actually not just Assembly - there are hardware description languages as VHDL thats handled in this topic f.e.:
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/132611/whats-the-motivation-in-using-verilog-or-vhdl-over-c
I am working on an application which supports many-core MIMD architectures (on consumer/desk-computers). I am currently worrying about the scaling behaviour of the application. Its designed to be massively parallel and addressing next-gen hardware. That's actually my problem. Does anyone know any software to simulate/emulate many-core MIMD Processors with >16 cores on a machine-code level? I've already implemented a software based thread sheduler with the ability to simulate multiple processors, by simple timing techniques.
I was curious if there's any software which could do this kind of simulation on a lower level preferably on an assembly language level to get better results. I want to emphasize once again that I'm only interested in MIMD Architectures. I know about OpenCL/CUDA/GPGPU but thats not what I'm looking for.
Any help is appreciated and thanks in advance for any answers.
You will rarely find all-purpose testing tools that are ALSO able to target very narrow (high-performance) corners - for a simple reason: the overhead of the "general-purpose" object will defeat that goal in the first place.
This is especially true with paralelism where locality and scheduling have a huge impact.
All this to say that I am affraid that you will have to write your own testing tool to target your exact usage pattern.
That's the price to pay for relevance.
If you are writing your application in C/C++, I might be able to help you out.
My company has created a tool that will take any C or C++ code and simulate its run-time behavior at bytecode level to find parallelization opportunities. The tool highlights parallelization opportunities and shows how parallel tasks behave.
The only mismatch is that our tool will also provide refactoring recipes to actually get to parallelization, whereas it sounds like you already have that.
I want to practice programming code for future hardware. What are these? The two main things that come to mind is 64bits and multicore. I also note that cache is important along and GPU have their own tech but right now i am not interested in any graphics programming.
What else should i know about?
-edit- i know a lot of these are in the present but pretty soon all cpus will be multicore and threading will be more important. I consider endians (big vs little) but found that not to be important and already have a big endian CPU to test on.
My recommendation for future :)
nVidia CUDA
nVidia Tegra
Or you can focusing on ray tracing.
If you'd like to dive into a "mainstream" OS that has full 64 bit support, I suggest you start coding against the beta of Mac OS X "Snow Leopard" (codename for 10.6). One of the big enhancements is Grand Central, which is a "facility" for developers to code for multicore systems. Grand Central should distribute workload not only between core, but also to the GPU.
Also very important is the explosion of smart devices such as the iPhone, Android, etc. I strongly believe that some upcoming so-called "netbooks" will rely on OS such as Android and iPhone OS, and as such knowing how to code against their SDK, and knowing how to optimize code for mobile devices is very important (e.g. optimizing performance graphic or otherwise, battery usage).
I can't foretell the future, but one aspect to look into is something like the CELL processor used in the PS3, where instead of many identical general purpose cores, there is only one (although capable of symmetric multithreading) plus many cores that are more specific purpose.
In a simple analysis, the Cell processor can be split into four components: external input and output structures, the main processor called the Power Processing Element (PPE) (a two-way simultaneous multithreaded Power ISA v.2.03 compliant core), eight fully-functional co-processors called the Synergistic Processing Elements, or SPEs, and a specialized high-bandwidth circular data bus connecting the PPE, input/output elements and the SPEs, called the Element Interconnect Bus or EIB.
CUDA and OpenCL are similar in that you separate your general purpose code and high performance computations into separate parts that may run on different hardware and language/api.
64 bits and multicore are the present not the future.
About the future:
Quantum computing or something like that?
How about learning OpenCL? It's a massively parallel processing language based on C. It's similar to nVidia's CUDA but is vendor agnostic. There are no major implementations yet, but expect to see some pretty soon.
As for 64 bit, don't really worry about. Programming will not really be any different unless you're doing really low level stuff (kernels). Higher level frameworks such as Java and .NET allow you to run code on 32 bit and 64 bit machines. Even C/C++ allows you to do this (but not quite so transparently).
I agree with Oli's answere (+1) and would add that in addition to 64-bit environments, you look at multi-core environments. The industry is getting pretty close to the end of the cycle of improvements in raw speed. But we're seeing more and more multi-core CPUs. So parallel or concurrent programming -- which is rilly rilly hard -- is quickly becoming very much in demand.
How can you prepare for this and practice it? I've been asking myself the same same question. So for, it seems to me like functional languages such as ML, Haskell, LISP, Arc, Scheme, etc. are a good place to begin, since truly functional languages are generally free of side effects and therefore very "parallelizable". Erlang is another interesting language.
Other interesting developments that I've found include
The Singularity Research OS
Transactional Memory and Software Isolated Processes
The many Software Engineering Podcast episodes on concurrency. (Here's the first one.)
This article from ACM Queue on "Real World Concurrency"
Of course this question is hard to answer because nobody knows what future hardware will look like (at least in long terms), but multi-threading/parallel programming are important and will be definitely even more important for some years.
I'd also suggest working with GPU computing like CUDA/Stream, but this could be a problem because it's very likely that this will change a lot the next years.
Why might a machine-dependent language be more appropriate for writing certain types of programs? What types of programs would be appropriate?
Why might a machine-dependent language
be more appropriate for writing
certain types of programs?
Speed
Some machines have special instructions sets (Like MMX or SSE on x86, for example) that allows to 'exploit' the architecture in ways that compilers may or may not utilize best (or not utilize at all). If speed is critical (such as video games or data-crunching programs), then you'd want to utilize the best out of the architecture you're on.
Where Portability is Useless
When coding a program for a specific device (take the iPhone or the Nintendo DS as examples), portability is the least of your concerns. This code will most likely never go to another platform as it's specifically designed for that architecture/hardware combination.
Developer Ignorance and/or Market Demand
Computer video games are prime example - Windows is the dominating computer game OS, so why target others? It will let the developers focus on known variables for speed/size/ease-of-use. Some developers are ignorant - they learn to code only on one platform (Such as .NET) and 'forget' that others platforms exist because they don't know about them. They seem to take an approach similar to "It works on my machine, why should I bother porting it to a bizarre combination that I will never use?"
No other choice.
I will take the iPhone again as it is a very good example. While you can program to it in C or C++, you cannot access any of the UI widgets that are linked against the Objective-C runtime. You have no other choice but to code in Objective-C if you want to access any of those widgets.
What types of programs would be
appropriate?
Embedded systems
All of the above apply - When you're coding for an embedded system, you want to take advantage of the full potential of the hardware you're working on. Be it memory management (Such as the CP15 on ARM9) or even obscure hardware that is only attached to the target device (servo motors, special sensors etc).
The best example I can think of is for small embedded devices. When you have to have full control over every detail of optimization due to extremely limited computing power (only a few kilobytes of RAM, for example), you might want to drop down to the assembler level yourself to make everything work perfectly in those small confines.
On the other hand, compilers have gotten sophisticated enough these days where you really don't need to drop below C for most situations, including embedded devices and microcontrollers. The situations are pretty rare when this is necessary.
Consider virtually any graphics engine. Since your run-of-the-mill general purpose CPU cannot perform operations in parallel, you would have a bare minimum of one cycle per pixel to be modified.
However, since modern GPUs can operate on many pixels (or other piece of data) all at the same time, the same operation can be finished much more quickly. GPUs are very well-suited for embarrassingly parallel problems.
Granted, we have high-level-language APIs to control our video cards nowadays, but as you get "closer to the metal", the raw language used to control a GPU is a different animal from the language to control a general purpose CPU, due to the vast difference in architectures.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I didn't find any useful information about programming languages for real time systems. All I found was Real Time Systems and Programming Languages: Ada 95, Real-Time Java and Real-Time C/POSIX (some pdf here), which seems to talk about extensions of Java and C for real times systems (I don't have the book to read). Also, the book was published in 2001, and the information may be obsolete now.
So, I'm dubious whether these languages are used in real world applications, or if real time systems in the real world are made in other languages, like DSLs.
If the second option is true for you, what are the outstanding characteristics of the language you use?
I am an avionics software engineer.
I was able to participate in several development projects.
The languages I used in those projects are: C, C++, and Real-time Java.
C is great.
C++ is not so bad but C/C++ require strict coding standards for the safety considerations such as DO-178B.
I think Real-time Java is the way to go but I don't see many avionics applications, yet.
Korean jet trainer T-50 will have a mission computer running RT Java application serving HUD and MFD displays, and all of the mission critical functions.
The Real-Time Specification for Java now has several commercial-grade implementations:
Sun's JavaRTS
IBM's WebSphere Real-Time
Aonix PERC
aicas JamaicaVM
Apogee Aphelion
These products span the continuum from compilation to native code (Aonix) to J2ME (aicas, apogee), to full J2SE (Sun, IBM). Most, if not all, have seen deployments in small numbers of safety- or mission-critical systems, but momentum is building. Examples include Eglin AFB's space surveillance radar modernization and the US Navy's use of RTSJ in the DDG-1000/Zumwalt destroyer. Sun also claims deployment in the financial transaction processing domain.
If you are interested in RTSJ, I suggest Peter Dibble's Real-Time Platform Programming, or Professor Wellings' Concurrent and Real-Time Programming in Java.
On a related note, there is also work underway to provide a Safety-Critical profile for the Java programming language, built as a subset of RTSJ. Also, an expert group has formed to explore a Distributed RTSJ DRTSJ, but the work is stalled.
The book covers use of Ada 95, the Java Real-Time System and realtime POSIX extensions (programmed in C). None of these is directly a domain specific language.
Ada 95 is a programming language commonly used in the late 90s and (AFAIK) still widely used for realtime programming in defence and aerospace industries. There is at least one DSL built on top of Ada - SparkAda - which is a system of annotations which describe system characteristics to a program verification tool.
This interview of April 6, 2006 indicates some of the classes and virtual machine changes which make up the Java Real-Time System. It doesn't mention any domain specific language extensions. I haven't come across use of Java in real-time systems, but I haven't been looking at the sorts of systems where I'd expect to find it (I work in aerospace simulation, where it's C++, Fortran and occasionally Ada for real-time in-the-loop systems).
Realtime POSIX is a set of extensions to the POSIX operating system facilities. As OS extensions, they don't require anything specific in the language. That said, I can think of one C based DSL for describing embedded systems - SystemC - but I've no idea if it's also used to generate the embedded systems.
Not mentioned in the book is Matlab, which in the last few years has gone from a simulation tool to a model driven development system for realtime systems.
Matlab/Simulink is, in effect, a DSL for linear programming, state machines and algorithms. Matlab can generate C or HDL for realtime and embedded systems. It's very rare to see an avionics, EW or other defence industry real-time job advertised which doesn't require some Matlab experience. (I don't work for Matlab, but it's hard to over emphasis how ubiquitous it really is in the industry)
Real time applications can be made in almost any language. The environment (operating system, runtime and runtime libraries) must however be compliant to real time constraints. In most cases real-time means that there's always a deterministic time in which something happens. Deterministic time being ussually a very low time value in the microseconds/milliseconds range.
Real time systems depend solely on this criteria, as the specificiations usually say something like 'Every x (period of time) (do something | check something)'. Usually this happens if the system interfaces with external sensors and controls life-saving or life-threatening systems.
I was working on an in-car navigation and infotainment system developed mostly in C/C++ with an operating system configured specifically to meet the real-time constraints to provide real-time navigation and media playback.
But this is not all to real-time systems: Usually the selection of algorithms in the entire system is made to have deterministic runtimes according to the Big-O notation, mostly using linear or constant time. Everything else is considered non-deterministic and thus not useable for real-time systems.
All of the real-time systems I have worked with were predominantly written in C with some bits of assembler, or written mostly in assembler with little bits of C. (Depending on whether we're talking the 90s and beyond, or the 80s, respectively.) However, some of the real-time systems I've worked with have used -- not exactly DSLs -- special homegrown code generators.
Real-time oriented language?
What is real-time
First we have to define what real-time mean.
Of course depending on how your tool will work against the physical environment pure real-time couldn't be effectively done, mostly because there will be a lot of third party dependencies.
If you are building embed stuff by using microcontrollers like arduino, the language to use will be limited by the hardware, but with more complex stuff like Raspberry Pi, the language choice is very wide.
Granularity
This is depending on what you are measuring, if you're working with:
weather temperatures, one read each 10 minute could be enough
people height or weight, one or maybe four read by day
server status, between 1 second for fine debugging to approx 1 hour for quiet unimportant secondary server.
atomic collision count: something finer...
Event based reading
The right (better) way for collecting data is based on value change event... whenever the device do permit it.
Your tool have to not poll values from device, but the device have to send values to your tool, when they change.
This could be done by using an hardware interrupt trigger or by using port protocole like RS-232 staying listening on some serial port, for sample.
Monitoring environment
The last thing to be warned is how legitimate user will interact with.
If you're building embed standalone device, like robot, you may use graphic libraries to interact with touch screen.
If you're building web based monitor, you may have to keep in mind that the client could be an old 800x600 monochrome screen, using poor internet connection and small processor... But depending on final goal if you may interact with clients, you could ensure strong hardware and strong internet connections. Anyway you have to watch for connexion loosing and event for communication delay between server and client. There is mostly third party dependencies.
Which programming language?
From there, the language choice is wide and clearly depend on
your knowledge.
granularity requested (by using event-based too, of course)
the amount of time you have to build the tool (money;)
delay, co-workers...
kind of device
kind of monitoring
some other political reasons
You could build real-time monitoring engine by using bash and sql only, I've seen sophisticated engines that was built under postgresql only... I've personally built a web based, solar energy monitor by using perl, mysql and javascript.
I cannot believe no one has mentioned LabVIEW programming language which is widely used for Real-time safety-critical systems. It has extensive libraries and well-known design patterns for architecturing and implementing for RT systems.
Also National Instruments makes various hardware (cRIO, PXI and etc) which are designed for real-time applications.
We use LabVIEW for Fracking (Hydraulic Fracturing) which is used in safety-critical environments.
PLCs run ladder and fbd code which is really a real-time dsl in the sense that your options are so limited that it is difficult to program in a way that would result in unpredictable runtime performance
A really purposeful application of the C language to real-time programming - and all related issues (such as parallel programming) - is offered by my Kickstarter
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/767046121/crawl-space-computing-with-connel
It is called "Wide Programming" and I've been doing it most of my life. The rewards include a software library and a book - designed to be useful.
the company I've been working for since 2003 has been developing and deploying a Scada/Mes platform. Original implementation started in 1993, used Modula2 on OS/2. Later (1998) it was ported to Ada95 and Windows. Currently (2019) we use Ada compiler by AdaCore. Our system was ported and has been deployed to 32/64 Windows, HPUX, OpenVMS (and lately even to Raspberry). We have multiple installation in central Europe (gas industry, refineries, factories, power plants).
We feel Ada's features give our system a high degree of reliability and prevents a lot of errors that would easily occour if we used languages like C.
See also my blog
https://www.ipesoft.com/en/blog/what-language-is-the-d2000-written