154 research outputs found

    Speculative Staging for Interpreter Optimization

    Full text link
    Interpreters have a bad reputation for having lower performance than just-in-time compilers. We present a new way of building high performance interpreters that is particularly effective for executing dynamically typed programming languages. The key idea is to combine speculative staging of optimized interpreter instructions with a novel technique of incrementally and iteratively concerting them at run-time. This paper introduces the concepts behind deriving optimized instructions from existing interpreter instructions---incrementally peeling off layers of complexity. When compiling the interpreter, these optimized derivatives will be compiled along with the original interpreter instructions. Therefore, our technique is portable by construction since it leverages the existing compiler's backend. At run-time we use instruction substitution from the interpreter's original and expensive instructions to optimized instruction derivatives to speed up execution. Our technique unites high performance with the simplicity and portability of interpreters---we report that our optimization makes the CPython interpreter up to more than four times faster, where our interpreter closes the gap between and sometimes even outperforms PyPy's just-in-time compiler.Comment: 16 pages, 4 figures, 3 tables. Uses CPython 3.2.3 and PyPy 1.

    Linear Haskell: practical linearity in a higher-order polymorphic language

    Get PDF
    Linear type systems have a long and storied history, but not a clear path forward to integrate with existing languages such as OCaml or Haskell. In this paper, we study a linear type system designed with two crucial properties in mind: backwards-compatibility and code reuse across linear and non-linear users of a library. Only then can the benefits of linear types permeate conventional functional programming. Rather than bifurcate types into linear and non-linear counterparts, we instead attach linearity to function arrows. Linear functions can receive inputs from linearly-bound values, but can also operate over unrestricted, regular values. To demonstrate the efficacy of our linear type system - both how easy it can be integrated in an existing language implementation and how streamlined it makes it to write programs with linear types - we implemented our type system in GHC, the leading Haskell compiler, and demonstrate two kinds of applications of linear types: mutable data with pure interfaces; and enforcing protocols in I/O-performing functions

    Simple optimizing JIT compilation of higher-order dynamic programming languages

    Get PDF
    ImplĂ©menter efficacement les langages de programmation dynamiques demande beaucoup d’effort de dĂ©veloppement. Les compilateurs ne cessent de devenir de plus en plus complexes. Aujourd’hui, ils incluent souvent une phase d’interprĂ©tation, plusieurs phases de compilation, plusieurs reprĂ©sentations intermĂ©diaires et des analyses de code. Toutes ces techniques permettent d’implĂ©menter efficacement un langage de programmation dynamique, mais leur mise en oeuvre est difficile dans un contexte oĂč les ressources de dĂ©veloppement sont limitĂ©es. Nous proposons une nouvelle approche et de nouvelles techniques dynamiques permettant de dĂ©velopper des compilateurs performants pour les langages dynamiques avec de relativement bonnes performances et un faible effort de dĂ©veloppement. Nous prĂ©sentons une approche simple de compilation Ă  la volĂ©e qui permet d’implĂ©menter un langage en une seule phase de compilation, sans transformation vers des reprĂ©sentations intermĂ©diaires. Nous expliquons comment le versionnement de blocs de base, une technique de compilation existante, peut ĂȘtre Ă©tendue, sans effort de dĂ©veloppement significatif, pour fonctionner interprocĂ©duralement avec les langages de programmation d’ordre supĂ©rieur, permettant d’appliquer des optimisations interprocĂ©durales sur ces langages. Nous expliquons Ă©galement comment le versionnement de blocs de base permet de supprimer certaines opĂ©rations utilisĂ©es pour implĂ©menter les langages dynamiques et qui impactent les performances comme les vĂ©rifications de type. Nous expliquons aussi comment les compilateurs peuvent exploiter les reprĂ©sentations dynamiques des valeurs par Tagging et NaN-boxing pour optimiser le code gĂ©nĂ©rĂ© avec peu d’effort de dĂ©veloppement. Nous prĂ©sentons Ă©galement notre expĂ©rience de dĂ©veloppement d’un compilateur Ă  la volĂ©e 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 gĂ©nĂ©rer du code efficace, qui rivalise avec les meilleures implĂ©mentations 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

    Benchmarking Implementations of Functional Languages with ``Pseudoknot'', a Float-Intensive Benchmark

    Get PDF
    Over 25 implementations of different functional languages are benchmarked using the same program, a floatingpoint intensive application taken from molecular biology. The principal aspects studied are compile time and execution time for the various implementations that were benchmarked. An important consideration is how the program can be modified and tuned to obtain maximal performance on each language implementation.\ud With few exceptions, the compilers take a significant amount of time to compile this program, though most compilers were faster than the then current GNU C compiler (GCC version 2.5.8). Compilers that generate C or Lisp are often slower than those that generate native code directly: the cost of compiling the intermediate form is normally a large fraction of the total compilation time.\ud There is no clear distinction between the runtime performance of eager and lazy implementations when appropriate annotations are used: lazy implementations have clearly come of age when it comes to implementing largely strict applications, such as the Pseudoknot program. The speed of C can be approached by some implemtations, but to achieve this performance, special measures such as strictness annotations are required by non-strict implementations.\ud The benchmark results have to be interpreted with care. Firstly, a benchmark based on a single program cannot cover a wide spectrum of 'typical' applications.j Secondly, the compilers vary in the kind and level of optimisations offered, so the effort required to obtain an optimal version of the program is similarly varied

    Overcoming Restraint: Composing Verification of Foreign Functions with Cogent

    Get PDF
    Cogent is a restricted functional language designed to reduce the cost of developing verified systems code. Because of its sometimes-onerous restrictions, such as the lack of support for recursion and its strict uniqueness type system, Cogent provides an escape hatch in the form of a foreign function interface (FFI) to C code. This poses a problem when verifying Cogent programs, as imported C components do not enjoy the same level of static guarantees that Cogent does. Previous verification of file systems implemented in Cogent merely assumed that their C components were correct and that they preserved the invariants of Cogent's type system. In this paper, we instead prove such obligations. We demonstrate how they smoothly compose with existing Cogent theorems, and result in a correctness theorem of the overall Cogent-C system. The Cogent FFI constraints ensure that key invariants of Cogent's type system are maintained even when calling C code. We verify reusable higher-order and polymorphic functions including a generic loop combinator and array iterators and demonstrate their application to several examples including binary search and the BilbyFs file system. We demonstrate the feasibility of verification of mixed Cogent-C systems, and provide some insight into verification of software comprised of code in multiple languages with differing levels of static guarantees
    • 

    corecore