The Java 5 Generics Compromise Orthogonality to Keep Compatibility

In response to a long-lasting anticipation by the Java community, version 1.5 of the Java 2 platform - referred to as Java 5 - introduced generic types and methods to the Java language. The Java 5 generics are a significant enhancement to the language expressivity because they allow straightforward composition of new generic classes from existing ones while reducing the need for a plethora of type casts. While the Java 5 generics are expressive, the chosen implementation method, type erasure, has triggered undesirable orthogonality violations. This paper identifies six cases of orthogonality violations in the Java 5 generics and demonstrates how these violations are mandated by the use of type erasure. The paper also compares the Java 5 cases of orthogonality violations to compatible cases in C# 2 and NextGen 2 and analyzes the trade-offs in the three approaches. The conclusion is that Java 5 users face new challenges: a number of generic type expressions are forbidden, while others that are allowed are left unchecked

The C++0x "Concepts" Effort

C++0x is the working title for the revision of the ISO standard of the C++ programming language that was originally planned for release in 2009 but that was delayed to 2011. The largest language extension in C++0x was "concepts", that is, a collection of features for constraining template parameters. In September of 2008, the C++ standards committee voted the concepts extension into C++0x, but then in July of 2009, the committee voted the concepts extension back out of C++0x. This article is my account of the technical challenges and debates within the "concepts" effort in the years 2003 to 2009. To provide some background, the article also describes the design space for constrained parametric polymorphism, or what is colloquially know as constrained generics. While this article is meant to be generally accessible, the writing is aimed toward readers with background in functional programming and programming language theory. This article grew out of a lecture at the Spring School on Generic and Indexed Programming at the University of Oxford, March 2010

Improving the Interoperation between Generics Translations

Generics on the Java platform are compiled using the erasure transformation, which only supports by-reference values. This causes slowdowns when generics operate on primitive types, such as integers, as they have to be transformed into reference-based objects. Project Valhalla is an effort to remedy this problem by specializing classes at load-time so they can efficiently handle primitive values. In its current early prototype, the Valhalla compilation scheme limits the interaction between specialized and erased generics, thus preventing certain useful code patterns from being expressed. Scala has been using compile-time specialization for 6 years and has three generics compilation schemes working side by side. In Scala, programmers are allowed to write code that freely exercises the interaction between the different compilation schemes, at the expense of introducing subtle performance issues. Similar performance issues can affect Valhalla-enabled bytecode, whether the code was written in Java or translated from other JVM languages. In this context we explain how we help programmers avoid these performance regressions in the miniboxing transformation: (1) by issuing actionable performance advisories that steer programmers away from performance regressions and (2) by providing alternatives to the standard library constructs that use the miniboxing encoding, thus avoiding the conversion overhead

Late Data Layout: Unifying Data Representation Transformations

Values need to be represented differently when interacting with certain language features. For example, an integer has to take an object-based representation when interacting with erased generics, although, for performance reasons, the stack-based value representation is better. To abstract over these implementation details, some programming languages choose to expose a unified high-level concept (the integer) and let the compiler choose its exact representation and insert coercions where necessary. This pattern appears in multiple language features such as value classes, specialization and multi-stage programming: they all expose a unified concept which they later refine into multiple representations. Yet, the underlying compiler implementations typically entangle the core mechanism with assumptions about the alternative representations and their interaction with other language features. In this paper we present the Late Data Layout mechanism, a simple but versatile type-driven generalization that subsumes and improves the state-of-the-art representation transformations. In doing so, we make two key observations: (1) annotated types conveniently capture the semantics of using multiple representations and (2) local type inference can be used to consistently and optimally introduce coercions. We validated our approach by implementing three language features as Scala compiler extensions: value classes, specialization (using the miniboxing representation) and a simplified multi-stage programming mechanism

Compiling Scala for Performance

Scala is a new programming language bringing together object-oriented and functional programming. Its defining features are uniformity and extensibility. Scala offers great flexibility for programmers, allowing them to grow the language through libraries. Oftentimes what seems like a language feature is in fact implemented in a library, effectively giving programmers the power of language designers. The downside of this flexibility is that familiar looking code may hide unexpected performance costs. It is important for Scala compilers to bring down this cost as much as possible. We identify several areas of impact for Scala performance: higher-order functions and closures, and generic containers used with primitive types. We present two complementary approaches for improving performance in these areas: optimizations and specialization. Compiler optimization can bring down the cost through a combination of aggressive inlining of higher-order functions, an extended version of copy-propagation and dead-code elimination. Both anonymous functions and boxing can be eliminated by this approach. We show on a number of benchmarks that these language features can be up to 5 times faster when properly optimized, on current day JVMs. We propose a new approach to compiling parametric polymorphism for performance at primitive types. We mix a homogeneous translation scheme with user-directed specialization for primitive types. Type parameters may be annotated to require specialization of code depending on them. We propose definition-site specialization for primitive types, achieving separate compilation and no boxing when both the definition and call site are specialized. Specialized classes are compatible with unspecialized code, and specialization agnostic code can work with specialized instances, meaning that specialization is opportunistic. We present a formalism of a small subset of Scala with specialization and prove that specialization preserves types. We implemented this translation in the Scala compiler and report on improvements on a set of benchmarks, showing that specialization can make programs more than two times faster

Code mobility and Java RMI

Imperial Users onl