Java Bytecode Crash Course

แชร์
ฝัง

ความคิดเห็น • 42

  • @124mun
    @124mun 3 ปีที่แล้ว +38

    Literally stumbled upon this but ended up watching the whole thing cuz of how brilliantly he explained it. Hats off 👏

    • @sebon11
      @sebon11 ปีที่แล้ว

      Did he? It all was nice, but that's all, still there was a looot of unclear things here...

  • @Jakob6174
    @Jakob6174 4 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    That was bloody brilliant, thank you soo much.

  • @zoom8304
    @zoom8304 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Thank you so much. Loved your presentation and learning from you

  • @anglikai9517
    @anglikai9517 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Wow, that is brilliant. Thanks !

  • @xortha3271
    @xortha3271 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Great talk!

  • @brendanli5488
    @brendanli5488 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    excellent explanation!!!

  • @duckydude20
    @duckydude20 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    sometimes, the TH-cam algorithm can do wonders. i like it.
    thanks for such an awesome talk... :)
    now it actually seems easier than asm.

  • @cheezeworm
    @cheezeworm ปีที่แล้ว

    god i love this speaker so much

  • @gevorg827
    @gevorg827 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Does anyone here knows how do you make a new Scanner and ask the user for input in Jasmin bytecode?

  • @ZemenFidel
    @ZemenFidel ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Very lucid explanation. But the video would've looked a lot nicer if the slides were placed on the left and the speaker on the right.

  • @MatthiasBloch
    @MatthiasBloch 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Nice talk! Short question:
    32:00:
    Instruction Index 8: Why is the long variable l2 loaded from constant pool index #3? I thought it should have been #4
    Follow up question: How does the constant pool for this particular example look like?
    Thanks you!

    • @AndriusKaliacius
      @AndriusKaliacius 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      why did you think it should've been #4?

    • @MindlessMegaLawl
      @MindlessMegaLawl 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Because #3 is the first part of the double, #4 is the second part, likely implicit

  • @asagk
    @asagk 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    From the sparse explanation about arguments on calls and return values it remains unclear to me weather the VM implements the return stack separately from the data/calculation stack or there is some hidden is going on in the shades. So what is it then for real about argument passing and return addresses on the stack?
    Another aspect unclear to me: In 31:41 arguments come as arguments in local variables, but when the call is presented (34:09) the arguments are provided by pushing on the stack, instead of of being passed as arguments in the locals registers. What is it now for real? On the stack or as arguments or in the locals registers? Just wondering ...

    • @paschikshehu7988
      @paschikshehu7988 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks for pointing that out; I actually came here just for that

    • @tanveerhasan2382
      @tanveerhasan2382 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      But I don't think JVM has registers to work with

  • @nigabals566
    @nigabals566 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    started off really well but was really rushed after about the 40th minute :/

  • @footballCartoon91
    @footballCartoon91 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    @8:31
    I don't understand..
    Why he said the program does not use CPU register?
    Only use the stack to add two numbers together?
    How is that possible?

    • @tanveerhasan2382
      @tanveerhasan2382 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      JVM is an abstraction over a CPU.
      The underlying machine code that translated from the byte code will use registers.
      But in JVM there are no registers

  • @stavros222
    @stavros222 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    How will locals up to 4 will be written? for example iload_4 and iload_5?

    • @mabed6692
      @mabed6692 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      There is iload instruction, which takes 1 byte operand. The operand is locals index. So instead of iload_4 (1-byte instruction) it will be iload 4 (1-byte instruction + 1-byte operand).

  • @DF-ss5ep
    @DF-ss5ep 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    How can the JVM has a heap of more than 4GB? Surely in 64-bit mode, references use "2 slots".

    • @DaedalusCommunity
      @DaedalusCommunity 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      If I understand this correctly, unlike in C, the references are not to memory addresses but to stuff like classes. Thus the limit is not to the amount of memory you can address, but to the number of classes you can reference, and that number is never gonna get to the max you can address with 32 bits

  • @deepakumardeepak
    @deepakumardeepak 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    CLASS

  • @theglorioussapphiremonkey4750
    @theglorioussapphiremonkey4750 4 ปีที่แล้ว +22

    The audio is kind of low :(

  • @Darrell-Hunt
    @Darrell-Hunt 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So source code is for babies I wanna know bytecode and why it’s how it is

  • @Anurag_Saxena
    @Anurag_Saxena 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    20:00:00

  • @vadimkot2354
    @vadimkot2354 ปีที่แล้ว

    next time please normalize audio, I barely can hear him

  • @mahkhi7154
    @mahkhi7154 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This Java Bytecode is Like C. Your God: Nothing Better Than C. Its Very Portable. Works on X86, ARM, PowerPC, Sparc.
    The Dalvik / Android Byte Code is Like C++. Less Portable. Will Only work on Sony's ARM CPU's and Intel. Wont work Well on PowerPC, Sparc.

  • @sussus4914
    @sussus4914 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Use of red as means to highlight code was a very stupid idea.

  • @omeraydindev
    @omeraydindev 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    9:20 in, just a future reference for myself

  • @abunapha
    @abunapha 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    can't hear anything

  • @allarehere3012
    @allarehere3012 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Speak louder it's not audible

  • @officialsebgaming
    @officialsebgaming 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    9 Comments

  • @mabed6692
    @mabed6692 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So much inefficient bytecode, mainly due to poor desing. I know it's from 1995, but still...

  • @beingnikhil155
    @beingnikhil155 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This talk is a torture

  • @johnlongaski2715
    @johnlongaski2715 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    OMG I was trying to fix some dumb java asm thing I was making while playing this in the background and didn't realize the method was static cuz I stayed up all night xD. When u mention static invocation doesn't have a this pointer it made me realize that is whats wrong. My dumbass didn't realize it was static for ages and thought maybe it was somehow making the first local var index the first method param. Thank you so much idk how long I would of been stuck with that

  • @johnlongaski2715
    @johnlongaski2715 ปีที่แล้ว

    12:29 I thought for a second he said “act sus” xD