Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Could you compile a program manually?

Could you compile a program manually?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
c++question
43 Posts 26 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Brandon X12000

    Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

    Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    Brandon T. H. wrote:

    Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand?

    Yes (well duh, computers can't compute anything that humans can't, they're just faster at it), and it's not even that hard (just time-consuming). Converting whatever-language source to assembly? Piece of cake. Assembling by hand? Conceptually simple, only requires looking things up in a table. Putting it in the right executable format? Ok that one is a little tricky to get right, but also not that hard.

    Brandon T. H. wrote:

    If so, could you point to some documents?

    Sure. For x86+windows: Intel manuals[^] ModRM encoding (on sandpile.org)[^] PE 101[^]

    Brandon T. H. wrote:

    Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd"

    I see no reason why this should be impossible.

    S B 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • B Brandon X12000

      Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

      Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

      L Offline
      L Offline
      lewax00
      wrote on last edited by
      #10

      Here's a more generic solution: Everything a computer does is manipulating numbers through a handful of basic operations (i.e. arithmetic, like addition/subtraction, and logic, like and, or, etc.), and move them around in memory. If you can manage those things then you can do anything a computer can do, it will just be much slower if you do. From a more mathematical stand point, any modern computer can be modeled as a Turing Machine[^], and you should be able to do everything a Turing machine can (of course, you won't have access to an infinite tape but this task is not infinite so you should be fine there). So to sum it up: if your computer can, you can too.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B Brandon X12000

        Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

        Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

        R Offline
        R Offline
        Roger Wright
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        It can be done, but it will take some time. Here's a manual[^].

        Will Rogers never met me.

        M 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • C c2423

          No reason you couldn't compile something by hand, but it wouldn't be a good use of your time. If you really must write binary code and see the end product you'd be much better off writing a C-like compiler and writing relatively high level code and compiling it automatically. Writing this stuff in C as opposed to machine code or binary would be orders of magnitude faster. Judging by a quick look at your profile, along with your previous similar question, it looks like you're trying to write your own OS of sorts - you might like to take a look at Minix[^] which is a simplified Unix OS - I had to choose part of it to rewrite for my degree, so it's not too hard to take a look at and work out how things like drivers work. As a side note, does anybody else ever feel like they're channelling the MS paperclip? "It looks like you're trying to write a letter", "It looks like you're trying to write an Operating System" Hope this helps, Chris

          _ Offline
          _ Offline
          _beauw_
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          When I look at some of the pie-in-the-sky news items about things like automatic parallelization, I get the sense that we are alarmingly close to the day when an animated character in an IDE says things like "it looks like you're trying to write an OS." I think this kind of thing is an example of what I call the "Hero Anti-Pattern," in which one supposedly brilliant developer abstracts everything (garbage collection, parallelization, "plumbing" code...) away from the rest of us. My gut tells me that self-proclaimed geniuses toiling away in a vacuum will probably never really keep the rest of us from having to worry about whatever it is they're trying to fix. Instead, what results is that these people get to shape the future of development, and rake in the concomitant glory and cash, while the rest of us just end up doing the same tasks (albeit in Hero-ized form).

          C J S 3 Replies Last reply
          0
          • B Brandon X12000

            Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

            Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

            _ Offline
            _ Offline
            _beauw_
            wrote on last edited by
            #13

            I've done a lot of hand-assembly, i.e. translating assembly language into machine language (raw numbers). This ends up being very mechanical. There's not much thought involved. As far as hand-compilation of higher-level language code goes, that's somewhat mechanical, too, and most people with CS degrees will have done some of this as a part of their education. One of my articles[^] relies pretty heavily on hand-compiled C code, although I must also note that I artificially constrained my use of C to certain features, to make this chore easier.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R realJSOP

              Oh, I see... You're new here... Take this sage advice in the spirit in which it's given - don't be a dork.

              ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
              -----
              You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
              -----
              "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

              R Offline
              R Offline
              RedDk
              wrote on last edited by
              #14

              That's a potentially devastating thing to say to a four year old

              L 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B Brandon X12000

                Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

                Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #15

                If you're interested in c++ you could download and build the clang compiler (or gcc if you're brave) then step through it as it compiles and links your program. Good luck.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • _ _beauw_

                  When I look at some of the pie-in-the-sky news items about things like automatic parallelization, I get the sense that we are alarmingly close to the day when an animated character in an IDE says things like "it looks like you're trying to write an OS." I think this kind of thing is an example of what I call the "Hero Anti-Pattern," in which one supposedly brilliant developer abstracts everything (garbage collection, parallelization, "plumbing" code...) away from the rest of us. My gut tells me that self-proclaimed geniuses toiling away in a vacuum will probably never really keep the rest of us from having to worry about whatever it is they're trying to fix. Instead, what results is that these people get to shape the future of development, and rake in the concomitant glory and cash, while the rest of us just end up doing the same tasks (albeit in Hero-ized form).

                  C Offline
                  C Offline
                  c2423
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  The way I look at it, they need to be kept busy doing something while the rest of us make stuff that actually benefits people.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • R realJSOP

                    Oh, I see... You're new here... Take this sage advice in the spirit in which it's given - don't be a dork.

                    ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
                    -----
                    You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
                    -----
                    "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Lost User
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17

                    He's not that new; and check out his signature. apologies if Brandon T.H is a girl.

                    One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Lost User

                      Brandon T. H. wrote:

                      Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand?

                      Yes (well duh, computers can't compute anything that humans can't, they're just faster at it), and it's not even that hard (just time-consuming). Converting whatever-language source to assembly? Piece of cake. Assembling by hand? Conceptually simple, only requires looking things up in a table. Putting it in the right executable format? Ok that one is a little tricky to get right, but also not that hard.

                      Brandon T. H. wrote:

                      If so, could you point to some documents?

                      Sure. For x86+windows: Intel manuals[^] ModRM encoding (on sandpile.org)[^] PE 101[^]

                      Brandon T. H. wrote:

                      Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd"

                      I see no reason why this should be impossible.

                      S Offline
                      S Offline
                      Sentenryu
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      remember me to get you a 5 when the vote system gets back online, you deserve it.

                      I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

                      B 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • R RedDk

                        That's a potentially devastating thing to say to a four year old

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        loctrice
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #19

                        :laugh:

                        If it moves, compile it

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          Yes, you just need to convert each line of source code into its object code equivalent. Once you have done that you build it into a binary file with a hex editor and, hey presto, Robert's your mother's brother.

                          One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          loctrice
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #20

                          Richard MacCutchan wrote:

                          hey presto, Robert's your mother's brother.

                          I punched the wife when I read that. I will never forget it.

                          If it moves, compile it

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • _ _beauw_

                            When I look at some of the pie-in-the-sky news items about things like automatic parallelization, I get the sense that we are alarmingly close to the day when an animated character in an IDE says things like "it looks like you're trying to write an OS." I think this kind of thing is an example of what I call the "Hero Anti-Pattern," in which one supposedly brilliant developer abstracts everything (garbage collection, parallelization, "plumbing" code...) away from the rest of us. My gut tells me that self-proclaimed geniuses toiling away in a vacuum will probably never really keep the rest of us from having to worry about whatever it is they're trying to fix. Instead, what results is that these people get to shape the future of development, and rake in the concomitant glory and cash, while the rest of us just end up doing the same tasks (albeit in Hero-ized form).

                            J Offline
                            J Offline
                            John Atten
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #21

                            Aren't we already almost there? VS: "File/New/ASP.NET MVC Project" or "File/New/Entity Model." Eclipse: "File/New/Java Package" Most modern IDE's abstract away so much boiler plate code that we have acheived almost the equivalent of Clippy already. Newcomers, such as myself, begin to believe that that's all there is to it. The "run" button, which in reality "builds" such projects then executes the build result, optionally stepping through in an integrated debugger, removes a whole lot behind-the-scenes operations. While all of these are great for productivity, and in many cases represent the ultimate goal of code re-use, they also deprive (for a time, anyway) us of the need to learn how these hidden parts of the process work.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • R realJSOP

                              Oh, I see... You're new here... Take this sage advice in the spirit in which it's given - don't be a dork.

                              ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
                              -----
                              You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
                              -----
                              "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

                              I Offline
                              I Offline
                              Isfeasachme
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #22

                              Sage advice... Pssh. Ya junior code snot. I'm glad I'm not the only assembler dork out there. This is the sort of question asked by people who end up designing the compilers you all use.

                              B 2 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • R Roger Wright

                                It can be done, but it will take some time. Here's a manual[^].

                                Will Rogers never met me.

                                M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Member 110323
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #23

                                Ah, the memories! First did this when my computer had a 16 bit address bus and 8 bit op-codes and a total of 4K of RAM. Then I discovered there was something called a "compiler" and haven't had the urge to engage in this kind of masochism since.

                                R 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • B Brandon X12000

                                  Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

                                  Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

                                  N Offline
                                  N Offline
                                  Norm Powroz
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #24

                                  I used to do this all the time in my mainframe days. Operating systems used to be written in assembler, and the only way to correct bugs or add extensions on the fly was to hand-assemble the code into pure machine code. One system I supported for a number of years had an on-line patcher so you could patch the O/S while the system was up and running. I used to give the operations staff hairy fits when I did this ;) Just to show how big some leaps can be -- I went from an all-assembler O/S to a machine whose O/S was written in PL/1. An interesting leap indeed, especially since the source code of the PL/1 O/S was all on-line, so you could use parts of it in your own applications.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • B Brandon X12000

                                    Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

                                    Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

                                    G Offline
                                    G Offline
                                    gggustafson
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #25

                                    Many years ago, while teaching at a local college and working as an architect for a new database system, I decided to write the compiler I was requiring my students to write. At that time, I was considered a good assembler programmer. I decided to compare the output of the compiler I wrote with my own hand-coded assembly. As I recall, my assembly contained about 15 instructions; the compiler's generated assembly code contained 8 instructions. I learned a valuable lesson.

                                    Gus Gustafson

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • B Brandon X12000

                                      Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

                                      Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

                                      P Offline
                                      P Offline
                                      patbob
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #26

                                      Of course you can. The act of compiling is simply a translation between the chacters you typed into a file and the sequence of binary bytes that need to get fed to the CPU for execution. The .sys or .vxd is merely a file format. All are documented. As for pointers to documents? Sorry, can't help you there.. I haven't cared about such documents for more than 20 years. Translating something like C++ to assembly is tedious at best. It would be quicker to do what the compiler cannot do -- take your knowledge of the desired behavior of the program, and write an assembly progam directly to accomplish the same task. Translating assembly to binary object code is a very simple per-instruction translation (well, it used to be.. but its a bit more complex now). The question is why? Why do you want to do that? If it is just to learn the process, its easier to take a compiler course as it'll start from basic concepts, evolving them into running code. It will be a lot easier to understand how a compiler works coming at it that way than trying to start with the 1s and 0s. You'll get lots of practice walking through all the steps of compilation along the way. Assembly is too easy to justify a course -- just grab an assembly manual for your processor of choice and read through it.

                                      We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • B Brandon X12000

                                        Is there some way to process a source-to-executable like a computer by hand? If so, could you point to some documents? Could you also compile a device driver source to ".sys" or ".vxd" (depending whether you are developing for a non-NT or NT Windows operating system)?

                                        Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H. Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst). Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

                                        B Offline
                                        B Offline
                                        BrainiacV
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #27

                                        When I was in high school I used to hand assemble a lot of programs. We only had access to the computers during school hours. In Print Shop, I created forms to write the source code on and left myself a column to write the opcodes into as well. But then I was programming DEC PDP-8's and they used 12 bit words with the first octal digit being the opcode, the rest being addressing. The operate commands were a bit trickier, but there was a rhyme and reason for most the bit settings, the rest you memorized. Used to do the same for multi-byte 6502, but today's 80x86 (if that still the term) multi-byte commands would be much, much harder.

                                        Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • _ _beauw_

                                          When I look at some of the pie-in-the-sky news items about things like automatic parallelization, I get the sense that we are alarmingly close to the day when an animated character in an IDE says things like "it looks like you're trying to write an OS." I think this kind of thing is an example of what I call the "Hero Anti-Pattern," in which one supposedly brilliant developer abstracts everything (garbage collection, parallelization, "plumbing" code...) away from the rest of us. My gut tells me that self-proclaimed geniuses toiling away in a vacuum will probably never really keep the rest of us from having to worry about whatever it is they're trying to fix. Instead, what results is that these people get to shape the future of development, and rake in the concomitant glory and cash, while the rest of us just end up doing the same tasks (albeit in Hero-ized form).

                                          S Offline
                                          S Offline
                                          SeattleC
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #28

                                          The end result of this abstraction cycle is an AI developer. You speak into the microphone, "Siri, write me an Accounts Receivable program." 'She' answers, "OK. How many accounts will you want to manage?" If anyone reading this post isn't frightened about the future of their career, or of the human race for that matter, you aren't paying attention. I'm glad I'm not just starting out my career.

                                          Z 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups