mu/020run.cc

572 lines
16 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

//: Phase 3: Start running a loaded and transformed recipe.
2015-04-17 18:22:59 +00:00
//:
2016-10-22 23:56:07 +00:00
//: The process of running Mu code:
2016-10-04 15:18:43 +00:00
//: load -> transform -> run
//:
2015-04-17 18:22:59 +00:00
//: So far we've seen recipes as lists of instructions, and instructions point
2016-10-22 23:56:07 +00:00
//: at other recipes. To kick things off Mu needs to know how to run certain
2015-04-17 18:22:59 +00:00
//: 'primitive' recipes. That will then give the ability to run recipes
//: containing these primitives.
//:
//: This layer defines a skeleton with just two primitive recipes: IDLE which
//: does nothing, and COPY, which can copy numbers from one memory location to
//: another. Later layers will add more primitives.
5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092 [2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning [3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2 The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky: a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling layers. b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code, which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort worth prioritizing in this project? On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier, the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax. There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes. Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out. --- This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-13 01:56:55 +00:00
void test_copy_literal() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num <- copy 23\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"run: {1: \"number\"} <- copy {23: \"literal\"}\n"
"mem: storing 23 in location 1\n"
);
}
void test_copy() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num <- copy 23\n"
" 2:num <- copy 1:num\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"run: {2: \"number\"} <- copy {1: \"number\"}\n"
"mem: location 1 is 23\n"
"mem: storing 23 in location 2\n"
);
}
void test_copy_multiple() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num, 2:num <- copy 23, 24\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 23 in location 1\n"
"mem: storing 24 in location 2\n"
);
}
:(before "End Types")
// Book-keeping while running a recipe.
//: Later layers will replace this to support running multiple routines at once.
2015-03-13 05:24:18 +00:00
struct routine {
recipe_ordinal running_recipe;
int running_step_index;
routine(recipe_ordinal r) :running_recipe(r), running_step_index(0) {}
2015-04-25 03:00:56 +00:00
bool completed() const;
2016-03-14 03:14:19 +00:00
const vector<instruction>& steps() const;
2015-03-13 05:24:18 +00:00
};
2015-03-22 00:53:20 +00:00
:(before "End Globals")
routine* Current_routine = NULL;
2017-07-09 21:34:17 +00:00
:(before "End Reset")
2016-10-25 20:33:51 +00:00
Current_routine = NULL;
2015-03-22 00:53:20 +00:00
:(code)
2016-10-22 23:10:23 +00:00
void run(const recipe_ordinal r) {
routine rr(r);
Current_routine = &rr;
run_current_routine();
2016-10-25 20:33:51 +00:00
Current_routine = NULL;
}
void run_current_routine() {
while (should_continue_running(Current_routine)) { // beware: may modify Current_routine
2015-06-17 07:57:27 +00:00
// Running One Instruction
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
if (current_instruction().is_label) { ++current_step_index(); continue; }
trace(Callstack_depth, "run") << to_string(current_instruction()) << end();
//? if (Foo) cerr << "run: " << to_string(current_instruction()) << '\n';
if (get_or_insert(Memory, 0) != 0) {
2016-02-26 21:04:55 +00:00
raise << "something wrote to location 0; this should never happen\n" << end();
put(Memory, 0, 0);
}
2015-11-19 16:43:32 +00:00
// read all ingredients from memory, each potentially spanning multiple locations
vector<vector<double> > ingredients;
if (should_copy_ingredients()) {
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(current_instruction().ingredients); ++i)
ingredients.push_back(read_memory(current_instruction().ingredients.at(i)));
}
2015-11-19 16:43:32 +00:00
// instructions below will write to 'products'
vector<vector<double> > products;
//: This will be a large switch that later layers will often insert cases
//: into. Never call 'continue' within it. Instead, we'll explicitly
//: control which of the following stages after the switch we run for each
//: instruction.
bool write_products = true;
bool fall_through_to_next_instruction = true;
switch (current_instruction().operation) {
2015-04-13 03:47:49 +00:00
// Primitive Recipe Implementations
2015-03-15 00:10:43 +00:00
case COPY: {
copy(ingredients.begin(), ingredients.end(), inserter(products, products.begin()));
2015-03-15 00:10:43 +00:00
break;
}
2015-04-13 03:47:49 +00:00
// End Primitive Recipe Implementations
2015-03-15 00:10:43 +00:00
default: {
2018-07-26 05:23:14 +00:00
raise << "not a primitive op: " << current_instruction().operation << '\n' << end();
2015-03-15 00:10:43 +00:00
}
2015-03-15 00:10:33 +00:00
}
//: used by a later layer
if (write_products) {
if (SIZE(products) < SIZE(current_instruction().products)) {
raise << SIZE(products) << " vs " << SIZE(current_instruction().products) << ": failed to write to all products in '" << to_original_string(current_instruction()) << "'\n" << end();
}
else {
4089 Clean up how we reclaim local scopes. It used to work like this (commit 3216): 1. Update refcounts of products after every instruction, EXCEPT: a) when instruction is a non-primitive and the callee starts with 'local-scope' (because it's already not decremented in 'return') OR: b) when instruction is primitive 'next-ingredient' or 'next-ingredient-without-typechecking', and its result is saved to a variable in the default space (because it's already incremented at the time of the call) 2. If a function starts with 'local-scope', force it to be reclaimed before each return. However, since locals may be returned, *very carefully* don't reclaim those. (See the logic in the old `escaping` and `should_update_refcount` functions.) However, this approach had issues. We needed two separate commands for 'local-scope' (reclaim locals on exit) and 'new-default-space' (programmer takes charge of reclaiming locals). The hard-coded reclamation duplicated refcounting logic. In addition to adding complexity, this implementation failed to work if a function overwrites default-space after setting up a local-scope (the old default-space is leaked). It also fails in the presence of continuations. Calling a continuation more than once was guaranteed to corrupt memory (commit 3986). After this commit, reclaiming local scopes now works like this: Update refcounts of products for every PRIMITIVE instruction. For non-primitive instructions, all the work happens in the `return` instruction: increment refcount of ingredients to `return` (unless -- one last bit of ugliness -- they aren't saved in the caller) decrement the refcount of the default-space use existing infrastructure for reclaiming as necessary if reclaiming default-space, first decrement refcount of each local again, use existing infrastructure for reclaiming as necessary This commit (finally!) completes the bulk[1] of step 2 of the plan in commit 3991. It was very hard until I gave up trying to tweak the existing implementation and just test-drove layer 43 from scratch. [1] There's still potential for memory corruption if we abuse `default-space`. I should probably try to add warnings about that at some point (todo in layer 45).
2017-10-23 06:14:19 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(current_instruction().products); ++i) {
// Writing Instruction Product(i)
write_memory(current_instruction().products.at(i), products.at(i));
4089 Clean up how we reclaim local scopes. It used to work like this (commit 3216): 1. Update refcounts of products after every instruction, EXCEPT: a) when instruction is a non-primitive and the callee starts with 'local-scope' (because it's already not decremented in 'return') OR: b) when instruction is primitive 'next-ingredient' or 'next-ingredient-without-typechecking', and its result is saved to a variable in the default space (because it's already incremented at the time of the call) 2. If a function starts with 'local-scope', force it to be reclaimed before each return. However, since locals may be returned, *very carefully* don't reclaim those. (See the logic in the old `escaping` and `should_update_refcount` functions.) However, this approach had issues. We needed two separate commands for 'local-scope' (reclaim locals on exit) and 'new-default-space' (programmer takes charge of reclaiming locals). The hard-coded reclamation duplicated refcounting logic. In addition to adding complexity, this implementation failed to work if a function overwrites default-space after setting up a local-scope (the old default-space is leaked). It also fails in the presence of continuations. Calling a continuation more than once was guaranteed to corrupt memory (commit 3986). After this commit, reclaiming local scopes now works like this: Update refcounts of products for every PRIMITIVE instruction. For non-primitive instructions, all the work happens in the `return` instruction: increment refcount of ingredients to `return` (unless -- one last bit of ugliness -- they aren't saved in the caller) decrement the refcount of the default-space use existing infrastructure for reclaiming as necessary if reclaiming default-space, first decrement refcount of each local again, use existing infrastructure for reclaiming as necessary This commit (finally!) completes the bulk[1] of step 2 of the plan in commit 3991. It was very hard until I gave up trying to tweak the existing implementation and just test-drove layer 43 from scratch. [1] There's still potential for memory corruption if we abuse `default-space`. I should probably try to add warnings about that at some point (todo in layer 45).
2017-10-23 06:14:19 +00:00
}
}
}
2016-08-16 21:55:10 +00:00
// End Running One Instruction
if (fall_through_to_next_instruction)
++current_step_index();
}
stop_running_current_routine:;
}
//: Helpers for managing trace depths
//:
//: We're going to use trace depths primarily to segment code running at
//: different frames of the call stack. This will make it easy for the trace
//: browser to collapse over entire calls.
//:
//: The entire map of possible depths is as follows:
//:
//: Errors will be depth 0.
//: Mu 'applications' will be able to use depths 1-99 as they like.
//: Primitive statements will occupy 100 and up to Max_depth, organized by
//: stack frames.
:(before "End Globals")
extern const int Initial_callstack_depth = 100;
int Callstack_depth = Initial_callstack_depth;
:(before "End Reset")
Callstack_depth = Initial_callstack_depth;
//: Other helpers for the VM.
2017-04-14 06:18:06 +00:00
:(code)
//: hook replaced in a later layer
bool should_continue_running(const routine* current_routine) {
assert(current_routine == Current_routine); // argument passed in just to make caller readable above
return !Current_routine->completed();
}
bool should_copy_ingredients() {
// End should_copy_ingredients Special-cases
return true;
}
bool is_mu_scalar(reagent/*copy*/ r) {
return is_mu_scalar(r.type);
}
bool is_mu_scalar(const type_tree* type) {
if (!type) return false;
if (is_mu_address(type)) return false;
if (!type->atom) return false;
if (is_literal(type))
return type->name != "literal-string";
return size_of(type) == 1;
}
bool is_mu_address(reagent/*copy*/ r) {
// End Preprocess is_mu_address(reagent r)
return is_mu_address(r.type);
}
bool is_mu_address(const type_tree* type) {
if (!type) return false;
if (is_literal(type)) return false;
if (type->atom) return false;
if (!type->left->atom) {
raise << "invalid type " << to_string(type) << '\n' << end();
return false;
}
return type->left->value == Address_type_ordinal;
}
//: Some helpers.
//: Important that they return references into the current routine.
2015-04-17 18:22:59 +00:00
//: hook replaced in a later layer
int& current_step_index() {
2015-04-25 03:23:34 +00:00
return Current_routine->running_step_index;
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
recipe_ordinal currently_running_recipe() {
return Current_routine->running_recipe;
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
const string& current_recipe_name() {
return get(Recipe, Current_routine->running_recipe).name;
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
2016-09-15 18:22:14 +00:00
const recipe& current_recipe() {
return get(Recipe, Current_routine->running_recipe);
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
const instruction& current_instruction() {
return get(Recipe, Current_routine->running_recipe).steps.at(Current_routine->running_step_index);
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
bool routine::completed() const {
return running_step_index >= SIZE(get(Recipe, running_recipe).steps);
}
//: hook replaced in a later layer
const vector<instruction>& routine::steps() const {
2016-03-14 03:14:19 +00:00
return get(Recipe, running_recipe).steps;
}
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
//:: Startup flow
:(before "End Mu Prelude")
load_file_or_directory("core.mu");
//? DUMP("");
//? exit(0);
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
//: Step 2: load any .mu files provided at the commandline
:(before "End Commandline Parsing")
// Check For .mu Files
2015-03-15 05:17:37 +00:00
if (argc > 1) {
// skip argv[0]
++argv;
--argc;
while (argc > 0) {
// ignore argv past '--'; that's commandline args for 'main'
if (string(*argv) == "--") break;
if (starts_with(*argv, "--"))
cerr << "treating " << *argv << " as a file rather than an option\n";
load_file_or_directory(*argv);
--argc;
++argv;
2015-03-15 05:17:37 +00:00
}
2015-11-28 01:49:30 +00:00
if (Run_tests) Recipe.erase(get(Recipe_ordinal, "main"));
}
transform_all();
//? cerr << to_original_string(get(Type_ordinal, "editor")) << '\n';
2018-06-16 05:16:09 +00:00
//? cerr << to_original_string(get(Recipe, get(Recipe_ordinal, "event-loop"))) << '\n';
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
//? DUMP("");
//? exit(0);
if (trace_contains_errors()) return 1;
if (Trace_stream && Run_tests) {
// We'll want a trace per test. Clear the trace.
delete Trace_stream;
Trace_stream = NULL;
2017-12-07 21:48:51 +00:00
}
save_snapshots();
2015-03-15 05:17:37 +00:00
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
//: Step 3: if we aren't running tests, locate a recipe called 'main' and
//: start running it.
:(before "End Main")
2015-11-28 01:49:30 +00:00
if (!Run_tests && contains_key(Recipe_ordinal, "main") && contains_key(Recipe, get(Recipe_ordinal, "main"))) {
// Running Main
reset();
trace(2, "run") << "=== Starting to run" << end();
assert(Num_calls_to_transform_all == 1);
run_main(argc, argv);
}
5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092 [2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning [3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2 The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky: a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling layers. b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code, which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort worth prioritizing in this project? On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier, the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax. There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes. Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out. --- This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-13 01:56:55 +00:00
:(code)
void run_main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
2015-11-28 01:49:30 +00:00
recipe_ordinal r = get(Recipe_ordinal, "main");
2015-03-15 05:17:37 +00:00
if (r) run(r);
}
void load_file_or_directory(string filename) {
if (is_directory(filename)) {
load_all(filename);
return;
}
ifstream fin(filename.c_str());
2015-04-07 19:10:14 +00:00
if (!fin) {
5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092 [2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning [3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2 The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky: a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling layers. b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code, which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort worth prioritizing in this project? On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier, the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax. There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes. Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out. --- This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-13 01:56:55 +00:00
cerr << "no such file '" << filename << "'\n" << end(); // don't raise, just warn. just in case it's just a name for a test to run.
2015-04-07 19:10:14 +00:00
return;
}
trace(2, "load") << "=== " << filename << end();
load(fin);
fin.close();
}
bool is_directory(string path) {
struct stat info;
if (stat(path.c_str(), &info)) return false; // error
return info.st_mode & S_IFDIR;
}
void load_all(string dir) {
dirent** files;
int num_files = scandir(dir.c_str(), &files, NULL, alphasort);
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < num_files; ++i) {
string curr_file = files[i]->d_name;
2018-02-16 04:36:16 +00:00
if (isdigit(curr_file.at(0)) && ends_with(curr_file, ".mu"))
load_file_or_directory(dir+'/'+curr_file);
free(files[i]);
files[i] = NULL;
}
free(files);
}
2018-02-16 04:36:16 +00:00
bool ends_with(const string& s, const string& pat) {
for (string::const_reverse_iterator p = s.rbegin(), q = pat.rbegin(); q != pat.rend(); ++p, ++q) {
if (p == s.rend()) return false; // pat too long
if (*p != *q) return false;
}
return true;
}
:(before "End Includes")
2016-06-02 17:40:06 +00:00
#include <dirent.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
//:: Reading from memory, writing to memory.
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
:(code)
2016-05-06 07:46:39 +00:00
vector<double> read_memory(reagent/*copy*/ x) {
// Begin Preprocess read_memory(x)
vector<double> result;
if (x.name == "null") result.push_back(/*alloc id*/0);
2015-06-17 19:39:09 +00:00
if (is_literal(x)) {
result.push_back(x.value);
2015-02-19 23:43:58 +00:00
return result;
}
// End Preprocess read_memory(x)
int size = size_of(x);
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int offset = 0; offset < size; ++offset) {
double val = get_or_insert(Memory, x.value+offset);
trace(Callstack_depth+1, "mem") << "location " << x.value+offset << " is " << no_scientific(val) << end();
2015-02-20 07:49:13 +00:00
result.push_back(val);
}
2015-02-19 23:24:20 +00:00
return result;
}
void write_memory(reagent/*copy*/ x, const vector<double>& data) {
assert(Current_routine); // run-time only
// Begin Preprocess write_memory(x, data)
if (!x.type) {
raise << "can't write to '" << to_string(x) << "'; no type\n" << end();
return;
}
2015-03-21 23:54:00 +00:00
if (is_dummy(x)) return;
2015-06-21 05:59:34 +00:00
if (is_literal(x)) return;
// End Preprocess write_memory(x, data)
2016-08-18 18:20:33 +00:00
if (x.value == 0) {
2017-05-26 23:43:18 +00:00
raise << "can't write to location 0 in '" << to_original_string(current_instruction()) << "'\n" << end();
2016-08-18 18:20:33 +00:00
return;
}
2015-06-21 05:55:01 +00:00
if (size_mismatch(x, data)) {
2017-05-26 23:43:18 +00:00
raise << maybe(current_recipe_name()) << "size mismatch in storing to '" << x.original_string << "' (" << size_of(x) << " vs " << SIZE(data) << ") at '" << to_original_string(current_instruction()) << "'\n" << end();
return;
2015-06-21 05:55:01 +00:00
}
// End write_memory(x) Special-cases
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int offset = 0; offset < SIZE(data); ++offset) {
assert(x.value+offset > 0);
trace(Callstack_depth+1, "mem") << "storing " << no_scientific(data.at(offset)) << " in location " << x.value+offset << end();
//? if (Foo) cerr << "mem: storing " << no_scientific(data.at(offset)) << " in location " << x.value+offset << '\n';
put(Memory, x.value+offset, data.at(offset));
2015-02-20 07:49:13 +00:00
}
2015-02-19 23:24:20 +00:00
}
:(code)
2018-06-16 05:16:09 +00:00
int size_of(const reagent& r) {
2016-06-18 00:14:15 +00:00
if (!r.type) return 0;
// End size_of(reagent r) Special-cases
return size_of(r.type);
2015-03-27 03:24:38 +00:00
}
int size_of(const type_tree* type) {
2016-06-18 00:14:15 +00:00
if (!type) return 0;
if (type->atom) {
if (type->value == -1) return 1; // error value, but we'll raise it elsewhere
if (type->value == 0) return 1;
// End size_of(type) Atom Special-cases
}
else {
if (!type->left->atom) {
raise << "invalid type " << to_string(type) << '\n' << end();
return 0;
}
if (type->left->value == Address_type_ordinal) return 2; // address and alloc id
// End size_of(type) Non-atom Special-cases
}
// End size_of(type) Special-cases
2015-03-27 03:50:56 +00:00
return 1;
2015-02-21 04:22:13 +00:00
}
2015-03-17 06:41:01 +00:00
2015-06-21 05:55:01 +00:00
bool size_mismatch(const reagent& x, const vector<double>& data) {
2016-06-18 00:14:15 +00:00
if (!x.type) return true;
// End size_mismatch(x) Special-cases
//? if (size_of(x) != SIZE(data)) cerr << size_of(x) << " vs " << SIZE(data) << '\n';
2015-06-21 05:55:01 +00:00
return size_of(x) != SIZE(data);
}
bool is_literal(const reagent& r) {
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
return is_literal(r.type);
}
bool is_literal(const type_tree* type) {
if (!type) return false;
if (!type->atom) return false;
return type->value == 0;
}
bool scalar(const vector<int>& x) {
2015-10-28 21:16:26 +00:00
return SIZE(x) == 1;
}
bool scalar(const vector<double>& x) {
2015-10-28 21:16:26 +00:00
return SIZE(x) == 1;
}
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
// helper for tests
2016-08-16 22:26:52 +00:00
void run(const string& form) {
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
vector<recipe_ordinal> tmp = load(form);
transform_all();
if (tmp.empty()) return;
if (trace_contains_errors()) return;
// if a test defines main, it probably wants to start there regardless of
// definition order
if (contains_key(Recipe, get(Recipe_ordinal, "main")))
run(get(Recipe_ordinal, "main"));
else
run(tmp.front());
2015-09-06 18:21:50 +00:00
}
5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092 [2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning [3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2 The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky: a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling layers. b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code, which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort worth prioritizing in this project? On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier, the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax. There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes. Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out. --- This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-13 01:56:55 +00:00
void test_run_label() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" +foo\n"
" 1:num <- copy 23\n"
" 2:num <- copy 1:num\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"run: {1: \"number\"} <- copy {23: \"literal\"}\n"
"run: {2: \"number\"} <- copy {1: \"number\"}\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_DOESNT_CONTAIN("run: +foo");
}
void test_run_dummy() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" _ <- copy 0\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"run: _ <- copy {0: \"literal\"}\n"
);
}
void test_run_null() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:&:num <- copy null\n"
"]\n"
);
}
void test_write_to_0_disallowed() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 0:num <- copy 34\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_DOESNT_CONTAIN("mem: storing 34 in location 0");
}
2016-10-22 23:56:07 +00:00
//: Mu is robust to various combinations of commas and spaces. You just have
2015-08-11 04:19:44 +00:00
//: to put spaces around the '<-'.
5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092 [2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning [3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2 The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky: a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling layers. b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code, which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort worth prioritizing in this project? On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier, the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax. There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes. Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out. --- This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-13 01:56:55 +00:00
void test_comma_without_space() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num, 2:num <- copy 2,2\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 2 in location 1\n"
);
}
void test_space_without_comma() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num, 2:num <- copy 2 2\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 2 in location 1\n"
);
}
void test_comma_before_space() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num, 2:num <- copy 2, 2\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 2 in location 1\n"
);
}
void test_comma_after_space() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num, 2:num <- copy 2 ,2\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 2 in location 1\n"
);
}
//:: Counters for trying to understand where Mu programs are spending their
//:: time.
:(before "End Globals")
bool Run_profiler = false;
// We'll key profile information by recipe_ordinal rather than name because
// it's more efficient, and because later layers will show more than just the
// name of a recipe.
//
// One drawback: if you're clearing recipes your profile will be inaccurate.
2017-09-01 08:50:10 +00:00
// So far that happens in tests, and in 'run-sandboxed' in a later layer.
map<recipe_ordinal, int> Instructions_running;
:(before "End Commandline Options(*arg)")
else if (is_equal(*arg, "--profile")) {
Run_profiler = true;
}
:(after "Running One Instruction")
if (Run_profiler) Instructions_running[currently_running_recipe()]++;
:(before "End One-time Setup")
atexit(dump_profile);
:(code)
void dump_profile() {
if (!Run_profiler) return;
if (Run_tests) {
cerr << "It's not a good idea to profile a run with tests, since tests can create conflicting recipes and mislead you. To try it anyway, comment out this check in the code.\n";
return;
}
ofstream fout;
fout.open("profile.instructions");
if (fout) {
for (map<recipe_ordinal, int>::iterator p = Instructions_running.begin(); p != Instructions_running.end(); ++p) {
fout << std::setw(9) << p->second << ' ' << header_label(p->first) << '\n';
}
}
fout.close();
// End dump_profile
}
// overridden in a later layer
string header_label(const recipe_ordinal r) {
return get(Recipe, r).name;
}