upvote

points

by pizlonator4 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby yjftsjthsd-h2 hours ago|
next
[-]
Wait, you have that working? What's the lowest friction to run it? Like, VM or docker container or...
reply
upvoteby pizlonator1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
VM

https://fil-c.org/pizlix

Then build WebKit using do_cmake_yolo_simpler.sh in projects/webkitgtk-2.44.3

It's still pretty rough, but works more than well enough to post on HN. My regression test is to post on X. That works too

reply
upvoteby yjftsjthsd-h1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Sweet, thanks. I guess running in a VM is also a bonus protective layer:)
reply
upvoteby pizlonator1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
lol yeah

Pls file bugs if you encounter issues.

Also, fair warning, it's hella slow right now on JS-heavy websites (like X). It barely works.

But we can fix that with some effort, I think

reply
upvoteby achierius1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Is that just the MiniBrowser?! I have to say I can't imagine daily driving that if so. Why WebKit over a Chromium-based (and more featureful) browser?
reply
upvoteby pizlonator52 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
I'll port Epiphany eventually.

WebKit's JS engine (JavaScriptCore) is super friendly to pointer capabilities. I did not have to change much to make it use the Fil-C GC instead of its own GC and to make it use a capability per JS object.

On the other hand, Chromium's JS engine (V8) does a bunch of crazy stuff with pointer encoding, so the best you could do there is probably a single arena for the whole JS heap.

Also, JavaScriptCore has a well-supported mode that involves not only zero JIT but a fully portable C++ interpreter. Not sure V8 has that.

reply
upvoteby krackers3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
For it to be memory safe, do you have to disable the JIT?
reply
upvoteby pizlonator3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yeah
reply
upvoteby amluto2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It sounds technically possible to build a JIT where a verifier checks that the JIT-generated code is correctly pizlonated before allowing it to become executable. :)
reply
upvoteby Ohentis1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I think it makes more sense to verify that the jit is correct than to verify that it's output is correct at runtime.
reply
upvoteby pizlonator1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Nah

It's damn near impossible to verify that the JIT is correct.

But it is possible to verify at runtime that the code that the JIT emitted obeys some memory safety law.

(V8's heap sandbox is an example of this; a sarcastic JIT would be an arguably stronger example of this.)

reply
upvoteby pizlonator1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yes

I have a new tech called SaRCAsm, which is a memory-safe assembler. So the next step is a "Sarcastic JIT" :-)

reply