Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

asmbb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 131 posts

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#91

Post by kragen »

pengaru wrote: post #25
andoando wrote: post #9

Man how do you even connect to a db with assembly code? Are there assembly libraries? In theory I understand it but the monumental amount of effort it would take to write such “simple” things would take so much time

C is generally first compiled into assembly anyways. When you program in assembly you're basically just doing the job of the compiler, and can call all the same library functions C code can. You just have to follow the calling conventions of the architecture. It's cumbersome and tedious, but nowhere near impossible. x64 made calling functions more annoying by using registers then spilling over into the stack after ex…

i suspect you mean i386, not x32; x32 is an almost unused abi added in 02011 for 64-bit amd and compatible processors, available with gcc -mx32. https://lwn.net/Articles/548838/ talks a bit about its early adoption

it's so little used that i can't find the abi documentation, but gcc -c -mx32 does seem to generate code that passes arguments in registers, not on the stack, contrary to your assertion

edit: after enough digging, i found https://web.archive.org/web/20130902094821/https://sites.goo... linking to https://web.archive.org/web/20201015005434/https://3263a7b2-... but x32-abi-1.0.pdf seems to be missing from the archive and https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://sites.google.com/site/...* doesn't look at all promising

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#92

Post by kragen »

kristianp wrote: post #50
pengaru wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C is generally first compiled into assembly anyways. When you program in assembly you're basically just doing the job of the compiler, and can call all the same library functions C code can. You just have to follow the calling conventions of the architecture. It's cumbersome and tedious, but nowhere near impossible. x64 made calling functions more annoying by using registers then spilling over into the stack after ex…

> C is generally first compiled into assembly anyways. I don't think that's right. C is compiled into an intermediate representation first. It's true that you can ask GCC etc. to generate assembly output, but it's not the default.

there are compilers that do not generate textual assembly output from their ir, but gcc in particular does

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#93

Post by pengaru »

kragen wrote: post #91
pengaru wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C is generally first compiled into assembly anyways. When you program in assembly you're basically just doing the job of the compiler, and can call all the same library functions C code can. You just have to follow the calling conventions of the architecture. It's cumbersome and tedious, but nowhere near impossible. x64 made calling functions more annoying by using registers then spilling over into the stack after ex…

i suspect you mean i386, not x32; x32 is an almost unused abi added in 02011 for 64-bit amd and compatible processors, available with gcc -mx32. https://lwn.net/Articles/548838/ talks a bit about its early adoption it's so little used that i can't find the abi documentation, but gcc -c -mx32 does seem to generate code that passes arguments in registers, not on the stack, contrary to your assertion edit: after enough…

You're right, I was sloppy in typing x32 for i386 (as you mentioned, nobody actually uses that).

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#94

Post by kragen »

pengaru wrote: post #93
kragen wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i suspect you mean i386, not x32; x32 is an almost unused abi added in 02011 for 64-bit amd and compatible processors, available with gcc -mx32. https://lwn.net/Articles/548838/ talks a bit about its early adoption it's so little used that i can't find the abi documentation, but gcc -c -mx32 does seem to generate code that passes arguments in registers, not on the stack, contrary to your assertion edit: after enough…

You're right, I was sloppy in typing x32 for i386 (as you mentioned, nobody actually uses that).

cool, thanks for clarifying

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#95

Post by bryan_w »

tazjin wrote: post #72
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coming from leading response time initiatives at a Big Tech, ouch. 1s is painful. Obviously transit time is a big part of that but if that's considered "good", well oof.

Well your average big tech site might transfer in a fraction of that, but then spends >5 seconds running JavaScript before anything useful happens.

You see, the client side metrics has the transfer time at 2ms and time to first interaction (onMouseOver event) at 5ms, and that aligns with the developer's experience on his M3 Mac on a network that's literally next door to the servers. :(

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#96

Post by donran »

tasn wrote: post #37

This is super cool, though I very much doubt the following statement: > AsmBB is very secure web application, because of the internal design and the reduced dependencies. There's a lot of value in using well tested dependencies, and even Chuck Norris will have bugs writing complex software in assembly. Especially when doing string manipulation which this project should be doing a lot of.

This comment was the first thing that popped up in my head when I saw the title of this post. I remember thinking the exact same when this project was part of a CTF I played, which just hosted the latest version of this project. At least 8 vulnerabilities were found during the competition.

https://ctftime.org/task/24399

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#97

Post by revskill »

tasn wrote: post #37

This is super cool, though I very much doubt the following statement: > AsmBB is very secure web application, because of the internal design and the reduced dependencies. There's a lot of value in using well tested dependencies, and even Chuck Norris will have bugs writing complex software in assembly. Especially when doing string manipulation which this project should be doing a lot of.

Whos' Chuck Norris ?

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#98

Post by bcrosby95 »

tasn wrote: post #37

This is super cool, though I very much doubt the following statement: > AsmBB is very secure web application, because of the internal design and the reduced dependencies. There's a lot of value in using well tested dependencies, and even Chuck Norris will have bugs writing complex software in assembly. Especially when doing string manipulation which this project should be doing a lot of.

Most popular dependencies aren't well tested because of the constant scope creep. And if they didn't constantly scope creep people would talk about it being "dead" because the last commit was 1+ year ago.

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#100

Post by apgwoz »

revskill wrote: post #97
tasn wrote: post #37

This is super cool, though I very much doubt the following statement: > AsmBB is very secure web application, because of the internal design and the reduced dependencies. There's a lot of value in using well tested dependencies, and even Chuck Norris will have bugs writing complex software in assembly. Especially when doing string manipulation which this project should be doing a lot of.

Whos' Chuck Norris ?

That answered my question.

Chuck Norris is a martial artist that had an acting career. He got a second wind of fame when he became a meme… Chuck Norris Facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris_facts

Post reply on HN