Handling dynamic memory allocations

[sparhawk]

Programming for a classic Amiga is quite different than on more modern machines. Obviously memory size plays a much stronger role, because of the more limited memory and of course thetr is also the issue of differentiating between chip and fast memory.

So when using a toolchain like gcc, how do you tackle the problem? Do you avoid using std containers? Vector is rather useful but the standard implementation is probably a bit problematic when writing more complex programs. I did some test and when I was using the std::string class the size of my executable was jump from 20kb to whooping 170kb, which is quite a lot.
So I assume that I have to do my own memory handling and avoid using the std containers? Or how do you deal with that?

[Samurai_Crow]

Bebbo is trying to get GCC to use NewLib as its C runtime. Aros already has an ArosC.library in its kernel. Using template specialization to wrap LibStdC++ runtimes might help in the future.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

when I was using the std::string class the size of my executable was jump from 20kb to whooping 170kb

And the problem is?

[Samurai_Crow]

The buffered iostream routines are pulling in a lot more dependencies at link time.

[bebbo]

* don't use iostreams
* and if you don't use exceptions add -fno-exceptions

[sparhawk]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

And the problem is?

It depends. An Amiga 1000 has (usually) 512kb, which is not much. Fresh from the factory it even has only 256kb but I guess that not many people actually use it as such.


So developing a game I would think that I rather use the memory for gfx and sound instead of io routines.


Anyway, I was just experimenting, to see how much overhead certain things will add. For example, using "new" instead of "malloc" also adds 70kb of additional size, which I also didn't expect.
When I created a barebone binary it had about 350bytes, using "printf" it increases to 20kb, which is IMO acceptable, because it's needed for debugging purposes. string functions are convenient, but considering the overhead I wouldn't use them for game code.

Originally Posted by bebbo

* don't use iostreams
* and if you don't use exceptions add -fno-exceptions

Does "no-exception" disable any exception or only prevents the standard functions not throwing?
So when I throw and catch within my own code, this would still work, or is it also disabled?

[hooverphonique]

If you're using gcc, you can use stuff like "-ffunction-sections" and "--gc-sections" to have the linker through out unused code - this will likely reduce your executable size.
Link time optimization ("-lto") may help further.

[bebbo]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

It depends. An Amiga 1000 has (usually) 512kb, which is not much. Fresh from the factory it even has only 256kb but I guess that not many people actually use it as such.


So developing a game I would think that I rather use the memory for gfx and sound instead of io routines.


Anyway, I was just experimenting, to see how much overhead certain things will add. For example, using "new" instead of "malloc" also adds 70kb of additional size, which I also didn't expect.

new throws an exception by default if the memory is exhausted.

Originally Posted by sparhawk

When I created a barebone binary it had about 350bytes, using "printf" it increases to 20kb, which is IMO acceptable, because it's needed for debugging purposes. string functions are convenient, but considering the overhead I wouldn't use them for game code.

You aren't using the -noixemul option.

Originally Posted by sparhawk

Does "no-exception" disable any exception or only prevents the standard functions not throwing?
So when I throw and catch within my own code, this would still work, or is it also disabled?

Guess the the exception stuff get's linked plus it won't work, since the startup does not initialize it properly.

[phx]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

It depends. An Amiga 1000 has (usually) 512kb, which is not much.
(...)
Anyway, I was just experimenting, to see how much overhead certain things will add. For example, using "new" instead of "malloc" also adds 70kb of additional size, which I also didn't expect.

You are asking for trouble when using C++ in such a low memory configuration. What's wrong with C?

[sparhawk]

Originally Posted by bebbo

new throws an exception by default if the memory is exhausted.

Yes, but this is a situation that is hard to handle anyway. And if memory gets exhausted, there is not much I can do about it, so it doesn't matter if the game crashes.

You aren't using the -noixemul option.

What does this do? Is there some overview about all these options and when to use them?

Guess the the exception stuff get's linked plus it won't work, since the startup does not initialize it properly.

Well, if it is linked anyway, then this option doesn't make much sense, right?

[sparhawk]

Originally Posted by phx

You are asking for trouble when using C++ in such a low memory configuration. What's wrong with C?

Currently I'm only experimenting with the memory, so these are just findings, that I consider interesting.


I don't really want to work with plain C, because C++ adds a lot of other stuff, which is useful and convenient. So knowing the limitations, I can take advantage of the C++ features that I want and can still fall back in some cases if it is necessary.


I prefer C++ because of it's inherent typesafety objects and overloading, which IMO makes the code much clearer. Also templates can be very useful, so all in all, even if one can not use the full feature set of an advanced C++ compiler, IMO there is enough benefit to still use it.

[nogginthenog]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

What does this do? Is there some overview about all these options and when to use them?

-noixemul tells GCC to not use the ixemul.library.

ixemul is a POSIX compatibility layer. It lets you easily port Unix style software.
The downside is that it's quite memory hungry and sometimes drops Amiga conventions for compatibility.

It was originally part of the GeekGadgets project (as was GCC) which includes all the userland tools that you would normally find on Linux/BSD etc.
This includes things like X Windows. I've had GIMP running on my Amiga.

[bebbo]

Originally Posted by nogginthenog

-noixemul tells GCC to not use the ixemul.library.

ixemul is a POSIX compatibility layer. It lets you easily port Unix style software.
The downside is that it's quite memory hungry and sometimes drops Amiga conventions for compatibility.

It was originally part of the GeekGadgets project (as was GCC) which includes all the userland tools that you would normally find on Linux/BSD etc.
This includes things like X Windows. I've had GIMP running on my Amiga.

my gcc toolchain is using a newlib implementation as default, since the ixemul.library did not build that easily... (if someone provides a working build for my toolchain, I'll add it back - maybe even as default)


and that newlib yields larger executables than libnix (aka -noixemul).

[sparhawk]

When I add " -noixemul" then I get an error:

/opt/amiga/bin/m68k-amigaos-ld: E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): multiple definition of `_exit'; E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): first defined here
c

[bebbo]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

When I add " -noixemul" then I get an error:

/opt/amiga/bin/m68k-amigaos-ld: E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): multiple definition of `_exit'; E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): first defined here
c

please unhide your command line / makefile

[sparhawk]

 m68k-amigaos-g++.exe --save-temps -Wall -pedantic -mcrt=nix13 -O3 -DNDEBUG -noixemul CMakeFiles/testing.dir/main.cpp.o -o ../bin/testing.exe -Wl,--out-implib,../bin/libtesting.dll.a -L/d/src/amiga/projects/testing/../lib/Release -lutils
/opt/amiga/bin/m68k-amigaos-ld: E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): multiple definition of `_exit'; E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): first defined here
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

[bebbo]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

 m68k-amigaos-g++.exe --save-temps -Wall -pedantic -mcrt=nix13 -O3 -DNDEBUG -noixemul CMakeFiles/testing.dir/main.cpp.o -o ../bin/testing.exe -Wl,--out-implib,../bin/libtesting.dll.a -L/d/src/amiga/projects/testing/../lib/Release -lutils
/opt/amiga/bin/m68k-amigaos-ld: E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): multiple definition of `_exit'; E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:E:/Programme/msys64/opt/amiga/m68k-amigaos/libnix/lib/ncrt0.o:(.text+0x64): first defined here
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

please use only one of
-mcrt=nix13
-noixemul

[sparhawk]

OK. Thanks! Then I stick to mcrt.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by sparhawk

It depends. An Amiga 1000 has (usually) 512kb, which is not much. Fresh from the factory it even has only 256kb but I guess that not many people actually use it as such.

My first Amiga was an A1000 with 256k. Not for long though. Even 512k was barely enough to do anything useful. But with 2MB of FastRAM...

Back then we were acutely aware of code bloat and went to great lengths to reduce it. I even wrote my own startup code and printf replacement. Today I don't worry about it so much. Anyone who has less than 1MB should get an upgrade.

[Hewitson]

Having more memory isn't an excuse to write shit code. Are you sure you don't work for Microsoft?