Comments on: Inspecting Obj-C parameters in gdb http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/ Clark’s musings Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:11:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Mac OS X Spelunking in PowerPC and x86 Assembly, part 1 | Arthur Chu | Web Develepment Aggregator http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-1569 Mac OS X Spelunking in PowerPC and x86 Assembly, part 1 | Arthur Chu | Web Develepment Aggregator Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:19:12 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-1569 [...] about x86. Despite the present and future of the Mac being x86, it seems like people have lots of anxiety about having to work with it.I think the problem is not a lack of documentation on x86 assembly, [...] [...] about x86. Despite the present and future of the Mac being x86, it seems like people have lots of anxiety about having to work with it.I think the problem is not a lack of documentation on x86 assembly, [...]

]]> By: Harry http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-286 Harry Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:53:34 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-286 thanks for this comparisons!! that's exactly what I was looking for. thanks for this comparisons!! that’s exactly what I was looking for.

]]> By: Avi http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Avi Sun, 17 May 2009 04:07:10 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-145 x86 assembly isn't so bad. I wrote a blog post about it: http://www.drissman.com/blog/archives/2009/05/16/reverseengineering_in_os_x_on_x86.html x86 assembly isn’t so bad. I wrote a blog post about it:

http://www.drissman.com/blog/archives/2009/05/16/reverseengineering_in_os_x_on_x86.html

]]> By: Karsten http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Karsten Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:10:26 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-43 thanks a lot for the list!! that's really helpful! even after so many years of Intel Macs, i still can't get my head around to understand this annoying stack stuff.... ppc with its registers is so much easier to understand... that's why i still keep my old powerbook around, its really a lifesaver! thanks a lot for the list!! that’s really helpful!

even after so many years of Intel Macs, i still can’t get my head around to understand this annoying stack stuff…. ppc with its registers is so much easier to understand…
that’s why i still keep my old powerbook around, its really a lifesaver!

]]> By: Benjamin Pollack http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Benjamin Pollack Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:06:07 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-12 Oh, G-d do I miss 68k assembler. Yes, I completely understand that the move to PowerPC was necessary, but the 68k was designed on purpose so that humans could understand it. If you had told me ten years ago that either 68k or x86 would survive into the indefinite future, I'd have thought you a lunatic if you'd insisted it would be x86. PowerPC's certainly far better than x86, but I'd argue that not even it is nearly as nice for the developer as 68k was (at least at an ISA level). For as long as I can for the same reason Daniel Jalkut does, I'll continue using my G5 for development. Hopefully by the time I switch, the significantly less disgusting x86_64 ISA will be standard enough that I can bypass ever having to really learn about the 32-bit API. Oh, G-d do I miss 68k assembler. Yes, I completely understand that the move to PowerPC was necessary, but the 68k was designed on purpose so that humans could understand it. If you had told me ten years ago that either 68k or x86 would survive into the indefinite future, I’d have thought you a lunatic if you’d insisted it would be x86. PowerPC’s certainly far better than x86, but I’d argue that not even it is nearly as nice for the developer as 68k was (at least at an ISA level).

For as long as I can for the same reason Daniel Jalkut does, I’ll continue using my G5 for development. Hopefully by the time I switch, the significantly less disgusting x86_64 ISA will be standard enough that I can bypass ever having to really learn about the 32-bit API.

]]> By: Daniel Jalkut http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-7 Daniel Jalkut Sat, 07 Feb 2009 05:22:57 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-7 Clark, great table. I rely on a bunch of really nifty PPC macros I've written to inspect parameters, etc. And one of the big hesitations I have to moving to i386 for full-time development/debugging is having to tackle the i386 ABI(s). I feel ya when you say that PPC was so much simpler ;) Clark, great table. I rely on a bunch of really nifty PPC macros I’ve written to inspect parameters, etc. And one of the big hesitations I have to moving to i386 for full-time development/debugging is having to tackle the i386 ABI(s). I feel ya when you say that PPC was so much simpler ;)

]]> By: Clark Cox http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-6 Clark Cox Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:21:02 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-6 Indeed, by the time I care about inspecting values, I'm usually well into a function, so I can usually assume that the prolog has already executed. Indeed, by the time I care about inspecting values, I’m usually well into a function, so I can usually assume that the prolog has already executed.

]]> By: Blake C. http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/2009/02/04/inspecting-obj-c-parameters-in-gdb/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Blake C. Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:51:16 +0000 http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/?p=12#comment-5 Those stack offsets in i386 assume that the prolog has executed. It might be useful to have another list that references %esp, for when someone sets a breakpoint on the function or method symbol. Those stack offsets in i386 assume that the prolog has executed. It might be useful to have another list that references %esp, for when someone sets a breakpoint on the function or method symbol.

]]>