From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
Cc: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se, owinebar@free-expression.org,
dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de, neil@ossau.uklinux.net,
guile-devel@gnu.org, djurfeldt@nada.kth.se,
djurfeldt@nada.kth.se
Subject: Re: goops and memoization
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:49:59 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200212040249.SAA24200@morrowfield.regexps.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xy7heduwmds.fsf@linnaeus.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> (message from Mikael Djurfeldt on Wed, 04 Dec 2002 03:25:51 +0100)
> Have you considered the approach of writing a custom optimizer (not O,
> but another optimizer) that can do a good job of "compiling" (scheme
> to scheme):
>
>
> (lambda (ms) (M (O (U ms))))
>
> ?
Hmm... could you please clarify this suggestion. What is the
core idea? To specify O in a custom language and compile it?
To optimize the composition of M O and U? Something else that
I have missed?
O, I am presuming, optimizes method selection, presumbably by ordering
tests of argument types in favorable orders and by generating
special-case tests where, otherwise, a generic search would be
required. Have I missed something?
So, O is a fairly straightforward scheme->scheme transform. It can
almost certainly be expressed in very regular form (a "custom
language" (such as a pattern-matching macro plus quasiquote) -- or
simply a narrow Scheme subset).
M and U are similar.
You can write them as three separate functions, and write a customized
optimizer that folds them together. It might even be able to take
advantage of non-general optimizations that apply only to these
functions.
You could look at the custom optimizer as a constant-folding exercise,
an abstract-evaluation exercize, or a partial-evaluation exercize
(where you are partially evaluating "(apply (compose M O U)
free-ms)").
The reason I think this is a plausible approach is just that the three
transforms involved (M O and U) don't need to be arbitrary code -- you
can do very well here just by thinking of them as pattern-matching
rewrite systems -- and such systems compose cleanly and should be easy
to optimize.
Clearer? or did I just make it worse :-)
(I used to suspect that Aubrey secretly generated `eval' using
techniques along these lines but eventually concluded: nah, he just
writes very consistent code. :-)
-t
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-04 2:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.GSO.4.05.10212011757340.18607-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>
2002-12-01 18:00 ` goops and memoization Neil Jerram
2002-12-02 8:45 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-12-02 9:14 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-12-03 0:13 ` Lynn Winebarger
2002-12-03 7:59 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-12-03 8:38 ` Tom Lord
2002-12-04 2:25 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-12-04 2:49 ` Tom Lord [this message]
2002-12-03 17:17 ` Lynn Winebarger
2002-12-04 2:41 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
[not found] <Pine.GSO.4.05.10212021836430.21423-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>
2002-12-04 2:19 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
[not found] <Pine.GSO.4.05.10212021650410.21423-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>
2002-12-04 1:53 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-12-04 2:38 ` Tom Lord
2002-12-04 2:56 ` Rob Browning
2002-11-16 13:41 Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-17 10:56 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-20 18:11 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-21 3:11 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-21 3:28 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-21 23:50 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-22 1:08 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-22 1:13 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-24 9:41 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-24 16:32 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-21 20:31 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-22 0:49 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2002-11-29 22:48 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-29 23:31 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-21 20:36 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-24 16:42 ` Dirk Herrmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200212040249.SAA24200@morrowfield.regexps.com \
--to=lord@regexps.com \
--cc=dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de \
--cc=djurfeldt@nada.kth.se \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=neil@ossau.uklinux.net \
--cc=owinebar@free-expression.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).