Simple optimizing JIT compilation of higher-order dynamic programming languages

Implémenter efficacement les langages de programmation dynamiques demande beaucoup d’effort de développement. Les compilateurs ne cessent de devenir de plus en plus complexes. Aujourd’hui, ils incluent souvent une phase d’interprétation, plusieurs phases de compilation, plusieurs représentations intermédiaires et des analyses de code. Toutes ces techniques permettent d’implémenter efficacement un langage de programmation dynamique, mais leur mise en oeuvre est difficile dans un contexte où les ressources de développement sont limitées. Nous proposons une nouvelle approche et de nouvelles techniques dynamiques permettant de développer des compilateurs performants pour les langages dynamiques avec de relativement bonnes performances et un faible effort de développement. Nous présentons une approche simple de compilation à la volée qui permet d’implémenter un langage en une seule phase de compilation, sans transformation vers des représentations intermédiaires. Nous expliquons comment le versionnement de blocs de base, une technique de compilation existante, peut être étendue, sans effort de développement significatif, pour fonctionner interprocéduralement avec les langages de programmation d’ordre supérieur, permettant d’appliquer des optimisations interprocédurales sur ces langages. Nous expliquons également comment le versionnement de blocs de base permet de supprimer certaines opérations utilisées pour implémenter les langages dynamiques et qui impactent les performances comme les vérifications de type. Nous expliquons aussi comment les compilateurs peuvent exploiter les représentations dynamiques des valeurs par Tagging et NaN-boxing pour optimiser le code généré avec peu d’effort de développement. Nous présentons également notre expérience de développement d’un compilateur à la volée pour le langage de programmation Scheme, pour montrer que ces techniques permettent effectivement de construire un compilateur avec un effort moins important que les compilateurs actuels et qu’elles permettent de générer du code efficace, qui rivalise avec les meilleures implémentations du langage Scheme.Efficiently implementing dynamic programming languages requires a significant development effort. Over the years, compilers have become more complex. Today, they typically include an interpretation phase, several compilation phases, several intermediate representations and code analyses. These techniques allow efficiently implementing these programming languages but are difficult to implement in contexts in which development resources are limited. We propose a new approach and new techniques to build optimizing just-in-time compilers for dynamic languages with relatively good performance and low development effort. We present a simple just-in-time compilation approach to implement a language with a single compilation phase, without the need to use code transformations to intermediate representations. We explain how basic block versioning, an existing compilation technique, can be extended without significant development effort, to work interprocedurally with higherorder programming languages allowing interprocedural optimizations on these languages. We also explain how basic block versioning allows removing operations used to implement dynamic languages that degrade performance, such as type checks, and how compilers can use Tagging and NaN-boxing to optimize the generated code with low development effort. We present our experience of building a JIT compiler using these techniques for the Scheme programming language to show that they indeed allow building compilers with less development effort than other implementations and that they allow generating efficient code that competes with current mature implementations of the Scheme language

Hybrid eager and lazy evaluation for efficient compilation of Haskell

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2002.Includes bibliographical references (p. 208-220).This electronic version was submitted by the student author. The certified thesis is available in the Institute Archives and Special Collections.The advantage of a non-strict, purely functional language such as Haskell lies in its clean equational semantics. However, lazy implementations of Haskell fall short: they cannot express tail recursion gracefully without annotation. We describe resource-bounded hybrid evaluation, a mixture of strict and lazy evaluation, and its realization in Eager Haskell. From the programmer's perspective, Eager Haskell is simply another implementation of Haskell with the same clean equational semantics. Iteration can be expressed using tail recursion, without the need to resort to program annotations. Under hybrid evaluation, computations are ordinarily executed in program order just as in a strict functional language. When particular stack, heap, or time bounds are exceeded, suspensions are generated for all outstanding computations. These suspensions are re-started in a demand-driven fashion from the root. The Eager Haskell compiler translates Ac, the compiler's intermediate representation, to efficient C code. We use an equational semantics for Ac to develop simple correctness proofs for program transformations, and connect actions in the run-time system to steps in the hybrid evaluation strategy.(cont.) The focus of compilation is efficiency in the common case of straight-line execution; the handling of non-strictness and suspension are left to the run-time system. Several additional contributions have resulted from the implementation of hybrid evaluation. Eager Haskell is the first eager compiler to use a call stack. Our generational garbage collector uses this stack as an additional predictor of object lifetime. Objects above a stack watermark are assumed to be likely to die; we avoid promoting them. Those below are likely to remain untouched and therefore are good candidates for promotion. To avoid eagerly evaluating error checks, they are compiled into special bottom thunks, which are treated specially by the run-time system. The compiler identifies error handling code using a mixture of strictness and type information. This information is also used to avoid inlining error handlers, and to enable aggressive program transformation in the presence of error handling.by Jan-Willem Maessen.Ph.D

Call Graphs for Languages with Parametric Polymorphism

The performance of contemporary object oriented languages depends on optimizations such as devirtualization, inlining, and specialization, and these in turn depend on precise call graph analysis. Existing call graph analyses do not take advantage of the information provided by the rich type systems of contemporary languages, in particular generic type arguments. Many existing approaches analyze Java bytecode, in which generic types have been erased. This paper shows that this discarded information is actually very useful as the context in a context-sensitive analysis, where it significantly improves precision and keeps the running time small. Specifically, we propose and evaluate call graph construction algorithms in which the contexts of a method are (i) the type arguments passed to its type parameters, and (ii) the static types of the arguments passed to its term parameters. The use of static types from the caller as context is effective because it allows more precise dispatch of call sites inside the callee. Our evaluation indicates that the average number of contexts required per method is small. We implement the analysis in the Dotty compiler for Scala, and evaluate it on programs that use the type-parametric Scala collections library and on the Dotty compiler itself. The context-sensitive analysis runs 1.4x faster than a context-insensitive one and discovers 20\% more monomorphic call sites at the same time. When applied to method specialization, the imprecision in a context-insensitive call graph would require the average method to be cloned 22 times, whereas the context-sensitive call graph indicates a much more practical 1.00 to 1.50 clones per method

Types and Intermediate Representations

The design objectives and the mechanisms for achieving those objectives are considered for each of three systems, Java, Erlang, and TIL. In particular, I examine the use of types and intermediate representations in the system implementation. In addition, the systems are compared to examine how one system\u27s mechanisms may (or may not) be applied to another

On the fly type specialization without type analysis

Les langages de programmation typés dynamiquement tels que JavaScript et Python repoussent la vérification de typage jusqu’au moment de l’exécution. Afin d’optimiser la performance de ces langages, les implémentations de machines virtuelles pour langages dynamiques doivent tenter d’éliminer les tests de typage dynamiques redondants. Cela se fait habituellement en utilisant une analyse d’inférence de types. Cependant, les analyses de ce genre sont souvent coûteuses et impliquent des compromis entre le temps de compilation et la précision des résultats obtenus. Ceci a conduit à la conception d’architectures de VM de plus en plus complexes. Nous proposons le versionnement paresseux de blocs de base, une technique de compilation à la volée simple qui élimine efficacement les tests de typage dynamiques redondants sur les chemins d’exécution critiques. Cette nouvelle approche génère paresseusement des versions spécialisées des blocs de base tout en propageant de l’information de typage contextualisée. Notre technique ne nécessite pas l’utilisation d’analyses de programme coûteuses, n’est pas contrainte par les limitations de précision des analyses d’inférence de types traditionnelles et évite la complexité des techniques d’optimisation spéculatives. Trois extensions sont apportées au versionnement de blocs de base afin de lui donner des capacités d’optimisation interprocédurale. Une première extension lui donne la possibilité de joindre des informations de typage aux propriétés des objets et aux variables globales. Puis, la spécialisation de points d’entrée lui permet de passer de l’information de typage des fonctions appellantes aux fonctions appellées. Finalement, la spécialisation des continuations d’appels permet de transmettre le type des valeurs de retour des fonctions appellées aux appellants sans coût dynamique. Nous démontrons empiriquement que ces extensions permettent au versionnement de blocs de base d’éliminer plus de tests de typage dynamiques que toute analyse d’inférence de typage statique.Dynamically typed programming languages such as JavaScript and Python defer type checking to run time. In order to maximize performance, dynamic language virtual machine implementations must attempt to eliminate redundant dynamic type checks. This is typically done using type inference analysis. However, type inference analyses are often costly and involve tradeoffs between compilation time and resulting precision. This has lead to the creation of increasingly complex multi-tiered VM architectures. We introduce lazy basic block versioning, a simple just-in-time compilation technique which effectively removes redundant type checks from critical code paths. This novel approach lazily generates type-specialized versions of basic blocks on the fly while propagating context-dependent type information. This does not require the use of costly program analyses, is not restricted by the precision limitations of traditional type analyses and avoids the implementation complexity of speculative optimization techniques. Three extensions are made to the basic block versioning technique in order to give it interprocedural optimization capabilities. Typed object shapes give it the ability to attach type information to object properties and global variables. Entry point specialization allows it to pass type information from callers to callees, and call continuation specialization makes it possible to pass return value type information back to callers without dynamic overhead. We empirically demonstrate that these extensions enable basic block versioning to exceed the capabilities of static whole-program type analyses

Particpants' Proceedings on the Workshop: Types for Program Analysis

As a satellite meeting of the TAPSOFT'95 conference we organized a small workshop on program analysis. The title of the workshop, ``Types for Program Analysis´´, was motivated by the recent trend of letting the presentation and development of program analyses be influenced by annotated type systems, effect systems, and more general logical systems. The contents of the workshop was intended to be somewhat broader; consequently the call for participation listed the following areas of interest:- specification of specific analyses for programming languages,- the role of effects, polymorphism, conjunction/disjunction types, dependent types etc.in specification of analyses,- algorithmic tools and methods for solving general classes of type-based analyses,- the role of unification, semi-unification etc. in implementations of analyses,- proof techniques for establishing the safety of analyses,- relationship to other approaches to program analysis, including abstract interpretation and constraint-based methods,- exploitation of analysis results in program optimization and implementation.The submissions were not formally refereed; however each submission was read by several members of the program committee and received detailed comments and suggestions for improvement. We expect that several of the papers, in slightly revised forms, will show up at future conferences. The workshop took place at Aarhus University on May 26 and May 27 and lasted two half days

Design and implementation of an optimizing type-centric compiler for a high-level language

Production compilers for programming languages face multiple requirements. They should be correct, as we rely on them to produce code. They should be fast, in order to provide a good developer experience. They should also be easy to maintain and evolve. This thesis shows how an expressive high level type system can be used to simplify the development of a compiler and demonstrates this on a compiler for Scala. First, it shows how expressive types of high level languages can be used to build internal data structures that provide a statically checked API, ensuring that important properties hold at compile time. Second, we also show how high level language features can be used to abstract the components of a compiler. We demonstrate this by introducing a type-safe layer on top of the bytecode emission phase. This makes it possible to abstract away the implementation details of the compiler frontend and run the same bytecode emission phase in two different Scala compilers. Third, it presents MiniPhases, a novel way to organize transformation passes in a compiler. MiniPhases impose constraints on the organization of passes that are beneficial for maintainability, performance, and testability. We include a detailed performance evaluation of MiniPhases which indicates that their speedup is due to improved cache friendliness and to a lower rate of promotions of objects into the old generations of garbage collectors. Finally, we demonstrate how the expressive type system of the language being compiled can be used for static analysis. We present a novel call graph construction algorithm which uses the typing context for context sensitivity. The resulting algorithm is both substantially faster and more precise than existing alternatives. We demonstrate the applicability of this analysis by extending common subexpression elimination to idempotent expression elimination

When and how java developers give up static type safety

The main goal of a static type system is to prevent certain kinds of errors from happening at run time. A type system is formulated as a set of constraints that gives any expression or term in a program a well-defined type. Besides detecting these kinds of errors, a static type system can be an invaluable maintenance tool, can be useful for documentation purposes, and can aid in generating more efficient machine code. However, there are situations when the developer has more information about the program that is too complex to explain in terms of typing constraints. To that end, programming languages often provide mechanisms that make the typing constraints less strict to permit more programs to be valid, at the expense of causing more errors at run time. These mechanisms are essentially two: Unsafe Intrinsics and Reflective Capabilities. We want to understand how and when developers give up these static constraints. This knowledge can be useful as: a) a recommendation for current and future language designers to make informed decisions, b) a reference for tool builders, e.g., by providing more precise or new refactoring analyses, c) a guide for researchers to test new language features, or to carry out controlled programming experiments, and d) a guide for developers for better practices. In this dissertation, we focus on the Unsafe API and cast operator---a subset of unsafe intrinsics and reflective capabilities respectively---in Java. We report two empirical studies to understand how these mechanisms---Unsafe API and cast operator---are used by Java developers when the static type system becomes too strict. We have devised usage patterns for both the Unsafe API and cast operator. Usage patterns are recurrent programming idioms to solve a specific issue. We believe that having usage patterns can help us to better categorize use cases and thus understand how those features are used

JavaScript AOT compilation

International audienceStatic compilation, a.k.a., ahead-of-time (AOT) compilation, is an alternative approach to JIT compilation that can combine good speed and lightweight memory footprint, and that can accommodate read-only memory constraints that are imposed by some devices and some operating systems. Unfortunately the highly dynamic nature of JavaScript makes it hard to compile statically and all existing AOT compilers have either gave up on good performance or full language support. We have designed and implemented an AOT compiler that aims at satisfying both. It supports full unrestricted ECMAScript 5.1 plus many ECMAScript 2017 features and the majority of benchmarks are within 50% of the performance of one of the fastest JIT compilers