Search Results

Search found 3929 results on 158 pages for 'genome assembly'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 38/158 | < Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >

  • delete a file in protected mode env(like windows xp)

    - by JGC
    hi I write a program to delete a file from somewhere of my harddisk in 8086 but when i use int 21h (ah=41h) an error happens and carry set to 1.and I cannot delete that. does anyone know what can I do? I think it should be from protected mode which does not allow my program to delete another file.I want the answer and language is not matter.

    Read the article

  • Setting processor to 32-bit mode

    - by dboarman-FissureStudios
    It seems that the following is a common method given in many tutorials on switching a processor from 16-bit to 32-bit: mov eax, cr0 ; set bit 0 in CR0-go to pmode or eax, 1 mov cr0, eax Why wouldn't I simply do the following: or cr0, 1 Is there something I'm missing? Possibly the only thing I can think of is that I cannot perform an operation like this on the cr0 register.

    Read the article

  • Outputting variable values in x86?

    - by Airjoe
    Hello All- I'm working on a homework assignment in x86 and it isn't working as I expect (surprise surprise!). I'd like to be able to output values of variables in x86 functions to ensure that the values are what I expect them to be. Is there a simple way to do this, or is it very complex? For what it's worth, the x86 functions are being used by a C file and compiled with gcc, so if that makes it simpler that is how I'm going about it. Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • Why would I need a using statement to Libary B extn methods, if they're used in Library A & it's Li

    - by Greg
    Hi, I have: Main Program Class - uses Library A Library A - has partial classes which mix in methods from Library B Library B - mix in methods & interfaces Why would I need a using statement to LibaryB just to get their extension methods working in the main class? That is given that it's Library B that defines the classes that will be extended. EDIT - Except from code // *** PROGRAM *** using TopologyDAL; using Topology; // *** THIS WAS NEEDED TO GET EXTN METHODS APPEARING *** class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var context = new Model1Container(); Node myNode; // ** trying to get myNode mixin methods to appear seems to need using line to point to Library B *** } } // ** LIBRARY A namespace TopologyDAL { public partial class Node { // Auto generated from EF } public partial class Node : INode<int> // to add extension methods from Library B { public int Key } } // ** LIBRARY B namespace ToplogyLibrary { public static class NodeExtns { public static void FromNodeMixin<T>(this INode<T> node) { // XXXX } } public interface INode<T> { // Properties T Key { get; } // Methods } }

    Read the article

  • Are programming languages and methods inefficient? (assembler and C knowledge needed)

    - by b-gen-jack-o-neill
    Hi, for a long time, I am thinking and studying output of C language compiler in assembler form, as well as CPU architecture. I know this may be silly to you, but it seems to me that something is very ineffective. Please, don´t be angry if I am wrong, and there is some reason I do not see for all these principles. I will be very glad if you tell me why is it designed this way. I actually truly believe I am wrong, I know the genius minds of people which get PCs together knew a reason to do so. What exactly, do you ask? I´ll tell you right away, I use C as a example: 1: Stack local scope memory allocation: So, typical local memory allocation uses stack. Just copy esp to ebp and than allocate all the memory via ebp. OK, I would understand this if you explicitly need allocate RAM by default stack values, but if I do understand it correctly, modern OS use paging as a translation layer between application and physical RAM, when address you desire is further translated before reaching actual RAM byte. So why don´t just say 0x00000000 is int a,0x00000004 is int b and so? And access them just by mov 0x00000000,#10? Because you wont actually access memory blocks 0x00000000 and 0x00000004 but those your OS set the paging tables to. Actually, since memory allocation by ebp and esp use indirect addressing, "my" way would be even faster. 2: Variable allocation duplicity: When you run application, Loader load its code into RAM. When you create variable, or string, compiler generates code that pushes these values on the top o stack when created in main. So there is actual instruction for do so, and that actual number in memory. So, there are 2 entries of the same value in RAM. One in form of instruction, second in form of actual bytes in the RAM. But why? Why not to just when declaring variable count at which memory block it would be, than when used, just insert this memory location?

    Read the article

  • easy asm program(nasm)

    - by GLeBaTi
    org 0x100 SEGMENT .CODE mov ah,0x9 mov dx, Msg1 int 0x21 ;string input mov ah,0xA mov dx,buff int 0x21 mov ax,0 mov al,[buff+1]; length ;string UPPERCASE mov cl, al mov si, buff cld loop1: lodsb; cmp al, 'a' jnb upper loop loop1 ;output mov ah,0x9 mov dx, buff int 0x21 exit: mov ah, 0x8 int 0x21 int 0x20 upper: sub al,32 jmp loop1 SEGMENT .DATA Msg1 db 'Press string: $' buff db 254,0 this code perform poorly. I think that problem in "jnb upper". This program make small symbols into big symbols.

    Read the article

  • Electronic resources for learning Z/OS assembler?

    - by Jared
    This is a follow up to this question. I'm totally blind so printed books aren't an option. All the recommended books appear to have been published before electronic publishing got started. I've been able to learn the very basics but would like something between here's what a register is, and the IBM reference material. Searching the normal places like Safari Books Online has come up dry.

    Read the article

  • translate ia32 into C

    - by David Lee
    I am trying to translate the following: Action: push %ebp #function prolog mov %esp, %ebp sub $0x10, %esp mov 0x8(%ebp), %eax #first line compiles to these 4 lines imul 0x8(%ebp), %eax sub $0x7, %eax mov %eax, -0x4(%ebp) addl $0x8, 0xc(%ebp) #second line mov -0x4(%ebp), %eax #third line mov 0xc(%ebp), %edx mov (%edx, %eax, 4), %eax add $0x3, %eax movb $0x41, (%eax) leave ret So far I have the following: //What am I missing? void Action(int x, char **y) { int z = x * x - 7; y+=8; //missing third line } What is the best way to translate this?

    Read the article

  • Is there any kind of standard for 8086 multiprocessing?

    - by Earlz
    Back when I made an 8086 emulator I noticed that there was the LOCK prefix intended for synchonization in a multiprocessor environment. Yet the only multitasking I know of for the x86 arch. involves use of the APIC which didn't come around until either the Pentiums or 486s. Was there any kind of standard for 8086 multitasking or was it done by some manufacturer specific extensions to the instruction set and/or special ports? By standard, I mean things like: How do you separate the 2 processors if they both use the same memory? This is impossible without some kind of way to make each processor execute a different piece of code. (or cause an interrupt on only one processor)

    Read the article

  • Why does it NOT give a segmentation violation?

    - by user198729
    The code below is said to give a segmentation violation: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> void function(char *str) { char buffer[16]; strcpy(buffer,str); } int main() { char large_string[256]; int i; for( i = 0; i < 255; i++) large_string[i] = 'A'; function(large_string); return 1; } It's compiled and run like this: gcc -Wall -Wextra hw.cpp && a.exe But there is nothing output. NOTE The above code indeed overwrites the ret address and so on if you really understand what's going underneath.

    Read the article

  • ARM Simulator on Windows

    - by Betamoo
    I am studying ARM Processors from a textbook... I thought it will be more useful if I could apply what I learn on an ARM simulator... writing code then watching results and different execution stages would be more fun... I have searched for it, but all I could find was either a freeware on linux or a demo on windows Is there a simulator that allow me to see execution steps and different changes for ARM processor (any version!) that runs on windows?? Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++ word to bytes

    - by Vit
    Hi, I tried to read CPUID using assembler in C++. I know there is function for it in , but I want the asm way. So, after CPUID is executed, it should fill eax,ebx,ecx registers with ASCII coded string. But my problem is, since I can in asm adress only full, or half eax register, how to break that 32 bits into 4 bytes. I used this: #include <iostream> #include <stdlib.h> int main() { _asm { cpuid /*There I need to mov values from eax,ebx and ecx to some propriate variables*/ } system("PAUSE"); return(0); }

    Read the article

  • Illegal instruction gcc assembler.

    - by Bernt
    In assembler: .globl _test _test: pushl %ebp movl %esp, %ebp movl $0, %eax pushl %eax popl %ebp ret Calling from c main() { _test(); } Compile: gcc -m32 -o test test.c test.s This code gives me illegal instruction sometimes and segment fault other times. In gdc i always get illegal instruction, this is just a simple test, i had a larger program that was working and suddenly after no apperant reason stopped working, now i always get this error even if i start from scratch like above. I have narrowed it down to pushl %eax (or any other register....), if i comment out that line the code runs fine. Any ideas? (I'm running the program at my universities linux cluster, so I have not changed any settings..)

    Read the article

  • What are CFI directives in Gnu Assembler (GAS) used for?

    - by claws
    There seem to be a .CFI directive after every line and also there are wide varities of these ex.,.cfi_startproc , .cfi_endproc etc.. more here. .file "temp.c" .text .globl main .type main, @function main: .LFB0: .cfi_startproc pushq %rbp .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 movq %rsp, %rbp .cfi_offset 6, -16 .cfi_def_cfa_register 6 movl $0, %eax leave ret .cfi_endproc .LFE0: .size main, .-main .globl func .type func, @function func: .LFB1: .cfi_startproc pushq %rbp .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 movq %rsp, %rbp .cfi_offset 6, -16 .cfi_def_cfa_register 6 movl %edi, -4(%rbp) movl %esi, %eax movb %al, -8(%rbp) leave ret .cfi_endproc .LFE1: .size func, .-func .ident "GCC: (Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu9) 4.4.1" .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits I didn't get the purpose of these.

    Read the article

  • "C variable type sizes are machine dependent." Is it really true? signed & unsigned numbers ;

    - by claws
    Hello, I've been told that C types are machine dependent. Today I wanted to verify it. void legacyTypes() { /* character types */ char k_char = 'a'; //Signedness --> signed & unsigned signed char k_char_s = 'a'; unsigned char k_char_u = 'a'; /* integer types */ int k_int = 1; /* Same as "signed int" */ //Signedness --> signed & unsigned signed int k_int_s = -2; unsigned int k_int_u = 3; //Size --> short, _____, long, long long short int k_s_int = 4; long int k_l_int = 5; long long int k_ll_int = 6; /* real number types */ float k_float = 7; double k_double = 8; } I compiled it on a 32-Bit machine using minGW C compiler _legacyTypes: pushl %ebp movl %esp, %ebp subl $48, %esp movb $97, -1(%ebp) # char movb $97, -2(%ebp) # signed char movb $97, -3(%ebp) # unsigned char movl $1, -8(%ebp) # int movl $-2, -12(%ebp)# signed int movl $3, -16(%ebp) # unsigned int movw $4, -18(%ebp) # short int movl $5, -24(%ebp) # long int movl $6, -32(%ebp) # long long int movl $0, -28(%ebp) movl $0x40e00000, %eax movl %eax, -36(%ebp) fldl LC2 fstpl -48(%ebp) leave ret I compiled the same code on 64-Bit processor (Intel Core 2 Duo) on GCC (linux) legacyTypes: .LFB2: .cfi_startproc pushq %rbp .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 movq %rsp, %rbp .cfi_offset 6, -16 .cfi_def_cfa_register 6 movb $97, -1(%rbp) # char movb $97, -2(%rbp) # signed char movb $97, -3(%rbp) # unsigned char movl $1, -12(%rbp) # int movl $-2, -16(%rbp)# signed int movl $3, -20(%rbp) # unsigned int movw $4, -6(%rbp) # short int movq $5, -32(%rbp) # long int movq $6, -40(%rbp) # long long int movl $0x40e00000, %eax movl %eax, -24(%rbp) movabsq $4620693217682128896, %rax movq %rax, -48(%rbp) leave ret Observations char, signed char, unsigned char, int, unsigned int, signed int, short int, unsigned short int, signed short int all occupy same no. of bytes on both 32-Bit & 64-Bit Processor. The only change is in long int & long long int both of these occupy 32-bit on 32-bit machine & 64-bit on 64-bit machine. And also the pointers, which take 32-bit on 32-bit CPU & 64-bit on 64-bit CPU. Questions: I cannot say, what the books say is wrong. But I'm missing something here. What exactly does "Variable types are machine dependent mean?" As you can see, There is no difference between instructions for unsigned & signed numbers. Then how come the range of numbers that can be addressed using both is different? I was reading http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2511246/how-to-maintain-fixed-size-of-c-variable-types-over-different-machines I didn't get the purpose of the question or their answers. What maintaining fixed size? They all are the same. I didn't understand how those answers are going to ensure the same size.

    Read the article

  • How to benchmark on multi-core processors

    - by Pascal Cuoq
    I am looking for ways to perform micro-benchmarks on multi-core processors. Context: At about the same time desktop processors introduced out-of-order execution that made performance hard to predict, they, perhaps not coincidentally, also introduced special instructions to get very precise timings. Example of these instructions are rdtsc on x86 and rftb on PowerPC. These instructions gave timings that were more precise than could ever be allowed by a system call, allowed programmers to micro-benchmark their hearts out, for better or for worse. On a yet more modern processor with several cores, some of which sleep some of the time, the counters are not synchronized between cores. We are told that rdtsc is no longer safe to use for benchmarking, but I must have been dozing off when we were explained the alternative solutions. Question: Some systems may save and restore the performance counter and provide an API call to read the proper sum. If you know what this call is for any operating system, please let us know in an answer. Some systems may allow to turn off cores, leaving only one running. I know Mac OS X Leopard does when the right Preference Pane is installed from the Developers Tools. Do you think that this make rdtsc safe to use again? More context: Please assume I know what I am doing when trying to do a micro-benchmark. If you are of the opinion that if an optimization's gains cannot be measured by timing the whole application, it's not worth optimizing, I agree with you, but I cannot time the whole application until the alternative data structure is finished, which will take a long time. In fact, if the micro-benchmark were not promising, I could decide to give up on the implementation now; I need figures to provide in a publication whose deadline I have no control over.

    Read the article

  • How do I patch a Windows API at runtime so that it to returns 0 in x64?

    - by Jorge Vasquez
    In x86, I get the function address using GetProcAddress() and write a simple XOR EAX,EAX; RET; in it. Simple and effective. How do I do the same in x64? bool DisableSetUnhandledExceptionFilter() { const BYTE PatchBytes[5] = { 0x33, 0xC0, 0xC2, 0x04, 0x00 }; // XOR EAX,EAX; RET; // Obtain the address of SetUnhandledExceptionFilter HMODULE hLib = GetModuleHandle( _T("kernel32.dll") ); if( hLib == NULL ) return false; BYTE* pTarget = (BYTE*)GetProcAddress( hLib, "SetUnhandledExceptionFilter" ); if( pTarget == 0 ) return false; // Patch SetUnhandledExceptionFilter if( !WriteMemory( pTarget, PatchBytes, sizeof(PatchBytes) ) ) return false; // Ensures out of cache FlushInstructionCache(GetCurrentProcess(), pTarget, sizeof(PatchBytes)); // Success return true; } static bool WriteMemory( BYTE* pTarget, const BYTE* pSource, DWORD Size ) { // Check parameters if( pTarget == 0 ) return false; if( pSource == 0 ) return false; if( Size == 0 ) return false; if( IsBadReadPtr( pSource, Size ) ) return false; // Modify protection attributes of the target memory page DWORD OldProtect = 0; if( !VirtualProtect( pTarget, Size, PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE, &OldProtect ) ) return false; // Write memory memcpy( pTarget, pSource, Size ); // Restore memory protection attributes of the target memory page DWORD Temp = 0; if( !VirtualProtect( pTarget, Size, OldProtect, &Temp ) ) return false; // Success return true; } This example is adapted from code found here: http://www.debuginfo.com/articles/debugfilters.html#overwrite .

    Read the article

  • Inline assembler get address of pointer Visual Studio

    - by Joe
    I have a function in VS where I pass a pointer to the function. I then want to store the pointer in a register to further manipulate. How do you do that? I have tried void f(*p) { __asm mov eax, p // try one FAIL __asm mov eax, [p] // try two FAIL __asm mov eax, &p // try three FAIL } Both 1 and 2 are converted to the same code and load the value pointed to. I just want the address. Oddly, option 1 works just fine with integers. void f() { int i = 5; __asm mov eax, i // SUCCESS? }

    Read the article

  • Interrupt On GAS

    - by Nathan Campos
    I'm trying to convert my simple program from Intel syntax to the AT&T(to compile it with GAS). I've successfully converted a big part of my application, but I'm still getting an error with the int(the interrupts). My function is like this: printf: mov $0x0e, %ah mov $0x07, %bl nextchar: lodsb or %al, %al jz return int 10 jmp nextchar return: ret msg db "Welcome To Track!", 0Ah But when I compile it, I got this: hello.S: Assembler messages: hello.S:13: Error: operand size mismatch for int' hello.S:19: Error: no such instruction:msg db "Hello, World!",0Ah' What I need to do?

    Read the article

  • Software Protection: Shuffeling my application?

    - by Martijn Courteaux
    Hi, I want to continue on my previous question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3007168/torrents-can-i-protect-my-software-by-sending-wrong-bytes Developer Art suggested to add a unique key to the application, to identifier the cracker. But JAB said that crackers can search where my unique key is located by checking for binary differences, if the cracker has multiple copies of my software. Then crackers change that key to make them self anonymous. That is true. Now comes the question: If I want to add a unique key, are there tools to shuffle (a kind of obfuscation) the program modules? So, that a binary compare would say that the two files are completely different. So they can't locate the identifier key. I'm pretty sure it is possible (maybe by replacing assembler blocks and make some jumps). I think it would be enough to make 30 to 40 shuffles of my software. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why is FLD1 loading NaN instead?

    - by Bernd Jendrissek
    I have a one-liner C function that is just return value * pow(1.+rate, -delay); - it discounts a future value to a present value. The interesting part of the disassembly is 0x080555b9 : neg %eax 0x080555bb : push %eax 0x080555bc : fildl (%esp) 0x080555bf : lea 0x4(%esp),%esp 0x080555c3 : fldl 0xfffffff0(%ebp) 0x080555c6 : fld1 0x080555c8 : faddp %st,%st(1) 0x080555ca : fxch %st(1) 0x080555cc : fstpl 0x8(%esp) 0x080555d0 : fstpl (%esp) 0x080555d3 : call 0x8051ce0 0x080555d8 : fmull 0xfffffff8(%ebp) While single-stepping through this function, gdb says (rate is 0.02, delay is 2; you can see them on the stack): (gdb) si 0x080555c6 30 return value * pow(1.+rate, -delay); (gdb) info float R7: Valid 0x4004a6c28f5c28f5c000 +41.68999999999999773 R6: Valid 0x4004e15c28f5c28f6000 +56.34000000000000341 R5: Valid 0x4004dceb851eb851e800 +55.22999999999999687 R4: Valid 0xc0008000000000000000 -2 =R3: Valid 0x3ff9a3d70a3d70a3d800 +0.02000000000000000042 R2: Valid 0x4004ff147ae147ae1800 +63.77000000000000313 R1: Valid 0x4004e17ae147ae147800 +56.36999999999999744 R0: Valid 0x4004efb851eb851eb800 +59.92999999999999972 Status Word: 0x1861 IE PE SF TOP: 3 Control Word: 0x037f IM DM ZM OM UM PM PC: Extended Precision (64-bits) RC: Round to nearest Tag Word: 0x0000 Instruction Pointer: 0x73:0x080555c3 Operand Pointer: 0x7b:0xbff41d78 Opcode: 0xdd45 And after the fld1: (gdb) si 0x080555c8 30 return value * pow(1.+rate, -delay); (gdb) info float R7: Valid 0x4004a6c28f5c28f5c000 +41.68999999999999773 R6: Valid 0x4004e15c28f5c28f6000 +56.34000000000000341 R5: Valid 0x4004dceb851eb851e800 +55.22999999999999687 R4: Valid 0xc0008000000000000000 -2 R3: Valid 0x3ff9a3d70a3d70a3d800 +0.02000000000000000042 =R2: Special 0xffffc000000000000000 Real Indefinite (QNaN) R1: Valid 0x4004e17ae147ae147800 +56.36999999999999744 R0: Valid 0x4004efb851eb851eb800 +59.92999999999999972 Status Word: 0x1261 IE PE SF C1 TOP: 2 Control Word: 0x037f IM DM ZM OM UM PM PC: Extended Precision (64-bits) RC: Round to nearest Tag Word: 0x0020 Instruction Pointer: 0x73:0x080555c6 Operand Pointer: 0x7b:0xbff41d78 Opcode: 0xd9e8 After this, everything goes to hell. Things get grossly over or undervalued, so even if there were no other bugs in my freeciv AI attempt, it would choose all the wrong strategies. Like sending the whole army to the arctic. (Sigh, if only I were getting that far.) I must be missing something obvious, or getting blinded by something, because I can't believe that fld1 should ever possibly fail. Even less that it should fail only after a handful of passes through this function. On earlier passes the FPU correctly loads 1 into ST(0). The bytes at 0x080555c6 definitely encode fld1 - checked with x/... on the running process. What gives?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >