DOCSLIB.ORG

Tierless Web Programming in ML Gabriel Radanne

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tierless Web Programming in ML Gabriel Radanne Tierless Web programming in ML Gabriel Radanne To cite this version: Gabriel Radanne. Tierless Web programming in ML. Programming Languages [cs.PL]. Université Paris Diderot (Paris 7), 2017. English. tel-01788885 HAL Id: tel-01788885 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01788885 Submitted on 9 May 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - ShareAlike| 4.0 International License Thèse de doctorat de l’Université Sorbonne Paris Cité Préparée à l’Université Paris Diderot au Laboratoire IRIF Ecole Doctorale 386 — Science Mathématiques De Paris Centre Tierless Web programming in ML par Gabriel Radanne Thèse de Doctorat d’informatique Dirigée par Roberto Di Cosmo et Jérôme Vouillon Thèse soutenue publiquement le 14 Novembre 2017 devant le jury constitué de Manuel Serrano Président du Jury Roberto Di Cosmo Directeur de thèse Jérôme Vouillon Co-Directeur de thèse Koen Claessen Rapporteur Jacques Garrigue Rapporteur Coen De Roover Examinateur Xavier Leroy Examinateur Jeremy Yallop Examinateur This work is licensed under a Creative Commons “Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International” license. Abstract Eliom is a dialect of OCaml for Web programming in which server and client pieces of code can be mixed in the same file using syntactic annotations. This allows to build a whole application as a single distributed program, in which it is possible to define in a composable way reusable widgets with both server and client behaviors. Eliom is type-safe, as it ensures that communications are well-behaved through novel language constructs that match the specificity of Web programming. Eliom is also efficient, it provides static slicing which separates client and server parts at compile time and avoids back-and-forth communications between the client and the server. Finally, Eliom supports modularity and encapsulation thanks to an extension of the OCaml module system featuring tierless annotations that specify whether some definitions should be on the server, on the client, or both. This thesis presents the design, the formalization and the implementation of the Eliom language. Résumé Eliom est un dialecte d’OCaml pour la programmation Web qui permet, à l’aide d’annotations syntaxiques, de déclarer code client et code serveur dans un même fichier. Ceci permet de construire une application complète comme un unique programme distribué dans lequel il est possible de définir des widgets aisément composables avec des comportements à la fois client et serveur. Eliom assure un bon comportement des communications grâce à un système de type et de nouvelles constructions adaptés à la programmation Web. De plus, Eliom est efficace : un découpage statique sépare les parties client et serveur durant la compilation et évite de trop nombreuses communications entre le client et le serveur. Enfin, Eliom supporte la modularité et l’encapsulation grâce à une extension du système de module d’OCaml permettant l’ajout d’annotations indiquant si une définition est présente sur le serveur, le client, ou les deux. Cette thèse présente la conception, la formalisation et l’implémention du langage Eliom. Remerciements Ceux qui me connaissent savent que je ne suis pas particulièrement expansif, je serai donc bref: je remercie ma famille, mes amis, mes collègues et l’univers. 5 Remerciements, Deuxième essai Je voudrais tout d’abord remercier mes deux directeurs de thèse, Roberto et Jérôme, qui ont formé une paire remarquablement complémentaire et m’ont beaucoup aidé dans tous les aspects de ma recherche, scientifiques ou non. Je remercie l’équipe Ocsigen et les membres de l’Irill pour leur compagnie, conseils et pour avoir pris le temps d’écouter mes idées farfelues sur les prochaines fonctionnalités révolutionnaires qui vont faire d’Eliom le langage de programmation Web le plus mieux au monde! Je remercie Jacques, pour cette petite remarque pendant ICFP 2015: “Tu devrais parler avec Oleg, ce que tu fais ressemble à MetaOCaml”. Merci également à Oleg, pour ses remarques et ses encouragements. Avant de commencer cette thèse, j’ai eu la chance de faire de nombreux stages. Je voudrais remercier tous les gens avec qui j’ai pu interagir à Édimbourg, Gotheborg et Grenoble. Ces stages m’ont beaucoup appris et surtout, je m’y suis énormément amusé! Merci également aux membres d’OCamllabs qui m’ont donné l’occasion de m’échapper de ma thèse pendant 3 mois pour faire joujou avec Mirage et boire du cidre dans les pubs de Cambridge. En parlant de cidre, merci à tous les potes de promo de Rennes: Benoit, Simon, Nicolas, Clément, Gael et tous les autres. Merci également à David pour son encadrement pendant mes études et pour m’avoir orienté vers d’excellents stages. Merci aux membres de l’IRIF avec qui j’ai pu interagir, notamment Vincent, Ralf, Jean-Baptiste et Michele avec qui j’ai eu le plaisir de faire mes enseignements et Alexis et Delia, pour leurs discussions et coups de pouce occasionnels. Je remercie particulière- ment Odile, sans qui, soyons honnête, je n’aurais jamais réussi à faire quoi que ce soit. Merci à tous les doctorants de PPS, en particulier la folle équipe du bureau 3026: Clé- ment, Yann, Rémi, Pierre, Amina, Charles, Léo, mon quotidien aurait été nettement plus terne sans vous. Enfin, je remercie ma famille, pour à peu près tout. 7 Contents 1 Introduction 13 1.1 On Web programming languages....................... 15 1.1.1 The client-server dichotomy...................... 15 1.1.2 Tierless programming languages.................... 16 1.1.3 Functional programming........................ 16 1.1.4 Static type systems........................... 17 1.1.5 Modularity and encapsulation..................... 17 1.2 Eliom ...................................... 19 1.2.1 The Ocsigen project......................... 19 1.2.2 Principles of the Eliom language................... 19 1.3 Plan....................................... 20 1.4 Contributions.................................. 21 2 Programming with Eliom 23 2.1 Core concepts.................................. 23 2.1.1 Sections................................. 23 2.1.2 Client fragments............................ 24 2.1.3 Injections................................ 24 2.2 Client-server behaviors............................. 24 2.2.1 Introducing side effects......................... 25 2.2.2 Communication and execution scheme................ 26 2.3 Heterogeneous datatypes............................ 26 2.3.1 Remote procedure calls........................ 27 2.3.2 Converters................................ 28 2.3.3 Client-server reactive broadcasts................... 29 2.4 Modules and signatures............................ 30 2.4.1 A primer on OCaml modules..................... 30 2.4.2 Modules and locations......................... 32 2.4.3 OCaml integration........................... 33 2.4.4 Heterogeneous implementations.................... 33 2.5 Mixed client-server data structures...................... 34 2.5.1 HTML ................................. 34 2.6 Shared values.................................. 35 2.6.1 Shared data-structures......................... 36 2.6.2 Mixed functors............................. 37 2.7 A sophisticated example: accordions..................... 37 2.8 Going further.................................. 40 9 3 The ML programming language 41 3.1 Syntax...................................... 41 3.2 Type system................................... 43 3.2.1 The expression language........................ 43 3.2.2 The module language......................... 45 3.2.3 Inference................................ 49 3.3 Semantics.................................... 49 3.3.1 Traces and Printing.......................... 52 3.3.2 Modules................................. 53 3.3.3 Notes on Soundness.......................... 56 3.4 Related works.................................. 56 4 The Eliom programming language 59 4.1 Syntax...................................... 60 4.1.1 Locations................................ 60 4.1.2 Expression language.......................... 61 4.1.3 Module language............................ 61 4.2 Type system................................... 62 4.2.1 Expressions............................... 62 4.2.2 Modules................................. 65 4.3 Interpreted semantics.............................. 72 4.3.1 Generated client programs....................... 72 4.3.2 Base, Client and Server declarations................. 73 4.3.3 Mixed modules............................. 77 4.4 Results on locations.............................. 81 4.4.1 Relation between ML and Eliom ................... 81 4.4.2 Notes on soundness........................... 83 5 Compilation of Eliom programs 85 5.1 Target languages MLs and MLc ....................... 85 5.1.1 Converters................................ 85 5.1.2 Injections................................ 86 5.1.3 Fragments................................ 87 5.1.4 Modules................................. 88 5.1.5 Type system rules........................... 89 5.1.6 Semantics rules............................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ML Module Mania: a Type-Safe, Separately Compiled, Extensible Interpreter
    ML Module Mania: A Type-Safe, Separately Compiled, Extensible Interpreter The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Ramsey, Norman. 2005. ML Module Mania: A Type-Safe, Separately Compiled, Extensible Interpreter. Harvard Computer Science Group Technical Report TR-11-05. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:25104737 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA ¡¢ £¥¤§¦©¨ © ¥ ! " $# %& !'( *)+ %¨,.-/£102©¨ 3¤4#576¥)+ %&8+9©¨ :1)+ 3';&'( )< %' =?>A@CBEDAFHG7DABJILKM GPORQQSOUT3V N W >BYXZ*[CK\@7]_^\`aKbF!^\K/c@C>ZdX eDf@hgiDf@kjmlnF!`ogpKb@CIh`q[UM W DABsr!@k`ajdtKAu!vwDAIhIkDi^Rx_Z!ILK[h[SI ML Module Mania: A Type-Safe, Separately Compiled, Extensible Interpreter Norman Ramsey Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University Abstract An application that uses an embedded interpreter is writ- ten in two languages: Most code is written in the original, The new embedded interpreter Lua-ML combines extensi- host language (e.g., C, C++, or ML), but key parts can be bility and separate compilation without compromising type written in the embedded language. This organization has safety. The interpreter’s types are extended by applying a several benefits: sum constructor to built-in types and to extensions, then • Complex command-line arguments aren’t needed; the tying a recursive knot using a two-level type; the sum con- embedded language can be used on the command line.
    [Show full text]
  • Seaflow Language Reference Manual Rohan Arora, Junyang Jin, Ho Sanlok Lee, Sarah Seidman Ra3091, Jj3132, Hl3436, Ss5311
    Seaflow Language Reference Manual Rohan Arora, Junyang Jin, Ho Sanlok Lee, Sarah Seidman ra3091, jj3132, hl3436, ss5311 1 Introduction 3 2 Lexical Conventions 3 2.1 Comments 3 2.2 Identifiers 3 2.3 Keywords 3 2.4 Literals 3 3 Expressions and Statements 3 3.1 Expressions 4 3.1.1 Primary Expressions 4 3.1.1 Operators 4 3.1.2 Conditional expression 4 3.4 Statements 5 3.4.1 Declaration 5 3.4.2 Immutability 5 3.4.3 Observable re-assignment 5 4 Functions Junyang 6 4.1 Declaration 6 4.2 Scope rules 6 4.3 Higher Order Functions 6 5 Observables 7 5.1 Declaration 7 5.2 Subscription 7 5.3 Methods 7 6 Conversions 9 1 Introduction Seaflow is an imperative language designed to address the asynchronous event conundrum by supporting some of the core principles of ReactiveX and reactive programming natively. Modern applications handle many asynchronous events, but it is difficult to model such applications using programming languages such as Java and JavaScript. One popular solution among the developers is to use ReactiveX implementations in their respective languages to architect event-driven reactive models. However, since Java and JavaScript are not designed for reactive programming, it leads to complex implementations where multiple programming styles are mixed-used. Our goals include: 1. All data types are immutable, with the exception being observables, no pointers 2. The creation of an observable should be simple 3. Natively support core principles in the ReactiveX specification 2 Lexical Conventions 2.1 Comments We use the characters /* to introduce a comment, which terminates with the characters */.
    [Show full text]
  • JNI – C++ Integration Made Easy
    JNI – C++ integration made easy Evgeniy Gabrilovich Lev Finkelstein [email protected] [email protected] Abstract The Java Native Interface (JNI) [1] provides interoperation between Java code running on a Java Virtual Machine and code written in other programming languages (e.g., C++ or assembly). The JNI is useful when existing libraries need to be integrated into Java code, or when portions of the code are implemented in other languages for improved performance. The Java Native Interface is extremely flexible, allowing Java methods to invoke native methods and vice versa, as well as allowing native functions to manipulate Java objects. However, this flexibility comes at the expense of extra effort for the native language programmer, who has to explicitly specify how to connect to various Java objects (and later to disconnect from them, to avoid resource leak). We suggest a template-based framework that relieves the C++ programmer from most of this burden. In particular, the proposed technique provides automatic selection of the right functions to access Java objects based on their types, automatic release of previously acquired resources when they are no longer necessary, and overall simpler interface through grouping of auxiliary functions. Introduction The Java Native Interface1 is a powerful framework for seamless integration between Java and other programming languages (called “native languages” in the JNI terminology). A common case of using the JNI is when a system architect wants to benefit from both worlds, implementing communication protocols in Java and computationally expensive algorithmic parts in C++ (the latter are usually compiled into a dynamic library, which is then invoked from the Java code).
    [Show full text]
  • Difference Between Method Declaration and Signature
    Difference Between Method Declaration And Signature Asiatic and relaxed Dillon still terms his tacheometry namely. Is Tom dirt or hierarchal after Zyrian Nelson hasting so variously? Heterozygous Henrique instals terribly. Chapter 15 Functions. How junior you identify a function? There play an important difference between schedule two forms of code block seeing the. Subroutines in C and Java are always expressed as functions methods which may. Only one params keyword is permitted in a method declaration. Complex constant and so, where you declare checked exception parameters which case, it prompts the method declaration group the habit of control passes the positional. Overview of methods method parameters and method return values. A whole object has the cash public attributes and methods. Defining Methods. A constant only be unanimous a type explicitly by doing constant declaration or. As a stop rule using prototypes is the preferred method as it. C endif Class HelloJNI Method sayHello Signature V JNIEXPORT. Method signature It consists of the method name just a parameter list window of. As I breathe in the difference between static and dynamic binding static methods are. Most electronic signature solutions in the United States fall from this broad. DEPRECATED Method declarations with type constraints and per source filter. Methods and Method Declaration in Java dummies. Class Methods Apex Developer Guide Salesforce Developers. Using function signatures to remove a library method Function signatures are known important snapshot of searching for library functions The F libraries. Many different kinds of parameters with rather subtle semantic differences. For addition as real numbers the distinction is somewhat moot because is.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Types Are Values
    Data Types Are Values James Donahue Alan Demers Data Types Are Values James Donahue Xerox Corporation Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Alan Demers Computer Science Department Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14853 CSL -83-5 March 1984 [P83-00005] © Copyright 1984 ACM. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. A bst ract: An important goal of programming language research is to isolate the fundamental concepts of languages, those basic ideas that allow us to understand the relationship among various language features. This paper examines one of these underlying notions, data type, with particular attention to the treatment of generic or polymorphic procedures and static type-checking. A version of this paper will appear in the ACM Transact~ons on Programming Languages and Systems. CR Categories and Subject Descriptors: 0.3 (Programming Languages), 0.3.1 (Formal Definitions and Theory), 0.3.3 (Language Constructs), F.3.2 (Semantics of Programming Languages) Additional Keywords and Phrases: data types, polymorphism XEROX Xerox Corporation Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 DATA TYPES ARE VALVES 1 1. Introduction An important goal of programming language research is to isolate the fundamental concepts of languages, those basic ideas that allow us to understand the relationship among various language features. This paper examines one of these underlying notions, data type, and presents a meaning for this term that allows us to: describe a simple treatment of generic or polymorphic procedures that preserves full static type-checking and allows unrestricted use of recursion; and give a precise meaning to the phrase strong typing, so that Language X is strongly typed can be interpreted as a critically important theorem about the semantics of the language.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Languages with Interpreters and Functional Programming Chapter 22
    Exploring Languages with Interpreters and Functional Programming Chapter 22 H. Conrad Cunningham 5 November 2018 Contents 22 Overloading and Type Classes 2 22.1 Chapter Introduction . .2 22.2 Polymorphism in Haskell . .2 22.3 Why Overloading? . .2 22.4 Defining an Equality Class and Its Instances . .4 22.5 Type Class Laws . .5 22.6 Another Example Class Visible ..................5 22.7 Class Extension (Inheritance) . .6 22.8 Multiple Constraints . .7 22.9 Built-In Haskell Classes . .8 22.10Comparison to Other Languages . .8 22.11What Next? . .9 22.12Exercises . 10 22.13Acknowledgements . 10 22.14References . 11 22.15Terms and Concepts . 11 Copyright (C) 2017, 2018, H. Conrad Cunningham Professor of Computer and Information Science University of Mississippi 211 Weir Hall P.O. Box 1848 University, MS 38677 (662) 915-5358 Browser Advisory: The HTML version of this textbook requires use of a browser that supports the display of MathML. A good choice as of November 2018 is a recent version of Firefox from Mozilla. 1 22 Overloading and Type Classes 22.1 Chapter Introduction Chapter 5 introduced the concept of overloading. Chapters 13 and 21 introduced the related concepts of type classes and instances. The goal of this chapter and the next chapter is to explore these concepts in more detail. The concept of type class was introduced into Haskell to handle the problem of comparisons, but it has had a broader and more profound impact upon the development of the language than its original purpose. This Haskell feature has also had a significant impact upon the design of subsequent languages (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-Platform Language Design
    Cross-Platform Language Design THIS IS A TEMPORARY TITLE PAGE It will be replaced for the final print by a version provided by the service academique. Thèse n. 1234 2011 présentée le 11 Juin 2018 à la Faculté Informatique et Communications Laboratoire de Méthodes de Programmation 1 programme doctoral en Informatique et Communications École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne pour l’obtention du grade de Docteur ès Sciences par Sébastien Doeraene acceptée sur proposition du jury: Prof James Larus, président du jury Prof Martin Odersky, directeur de thèse Prof Edouard Bugnion, rapporteur Dr Andreas Rossberg, rapporteur Prof Peter Van Roy, rapporteur Lausanne, EPFL, 2018 It is better to repent a sin than regret the loss of a pleasure. — Oscar Wilde Acknowledgments Although there is only one name written in a large font on the front page, there are many people without which this thesis would never have happened, or would not have been quite the same. Five years is a long time, during which I had the privilege to work, discuss, sing, learn and have fun with many people. I am afraid to make a list, for I am sure I will forget some. Nevertheless, I will try my best. First, I would like to thank my advisor, Martin Odersky, for giving me the opportunity to fulfill a dream, that of being part of the design and development team of my favorite programming language. Many thanks for letting me explore the design of Scala.js in my own way, while at the same time always being there when I needed him.
    [Show full text]
  • Functional C
    Functional C Pieter Hartel Henk Muller January 3, 1999 i Functional C Pieter Hartel Henk Muller University of Southampton University of Bristol Revision: 6.7 ii To Marijke Pieter To my family and other sources of inspiration Henk Revision: 6.7 c 1995,1996 Pieter Hartel & Henk Muller, all rights reserved. Preface The Computer Science Departments of many universities teach a functional lan- guage as the first programming language. Using a functional language with its high level of abstraction helps to emphasize the principles of programming. Func- tional programming is only one of the paradigms with which a student should be acquainted. Imperative, Concurrent, Object-Oriented, and Logic programming are also important. Depending on the problem to be solved, one of the paradigms will be chosen as the most natural paradigm for that problem. This book is the course material to teach a second paradigm: imperative pro- gramming, using C as the programming language. The book has been written so that it builds on the knowledge that the students have acquired during their first course on functional programming, using SML. The prerequisite of this book is that the principles of programming are already understood; this book does not specifically aim to teach `problem solving' or `programming'. This book aims to: ¡ Familiarise the reader with imperative programming as another way of imple- menting programs. The aim is to preserve the programming style, that is, the programmer thinks functionally while implementing an imperative pro- gram. ¡ Provide understanding of the differences between functional and imperative pro- gramming. Functional programming is a high level activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Julia: a Modern Language for Modern ML
    Julia: A modern language for modern ML Dr. Viral Shah and Dr. Simon Byrne www.juliacomputing.com What we do: Modernize Technical Computing Today’s technical computing landscape: • Develop new learning algorithms • Run them in parallel on large datasets • Leverage accelerators like GPUs, Xeon Phis • Embed into intelligent products “Business as usual” will simply not do! General Micro-benchmarks: Julia performs almost as fast as C • 10X faster than Python • 100X faster than R & MATLAB Performance benchmark relative to C. A value of 1 means as fast as C. Lower values are better. A real application: Gillespie simulations in systems biology 745x faster than R • Gillespie simulations are used in the field of drug discovery. • Also used for simulations of epidemiological models to study disease propagation • Julia package (Gillespie.jl) is the state of the art in Gillespie simulations • https://github.com/openjournals/joss- papers/blob/master/joss.00042/10.21105.joss.00042.pdf Implementation Time per simulation (ms) R (GillespieSSA) 894.25 R (handcoded) 1087.94 Rcpp (handcoded) 1.31 Julia (Gillespie.jl) 3.99 Julia (Gillespie.jl, passing object) 1.78 Julia (handcoded) 1.2 Those who convert ideas to products fastest will win Computer Quants develop Scientists prepare algorithms The last 25 years for production (Python, R, SAS, DEPLOY (C++, C#, Java) Matlab) Quants and Computer Compress the Scientists DEPLOY innovation cycle collaborate on one platform - JULIA with Julia Julia offers competitive advantages to its users Julia is poised to become one of the Thank you for Julia. Yo u ' v e k i n d l ed leading tools deployed by developers serious excitement.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Library Interface by Daniel Adler Dia Applications That Can Run on a Multitude of Plat- Forms
    30 CONTRIBUTED RESEARCH ARTICLES Foreign Library Interface by Daniel Adler dia applications that can run on a multitude of plat- forms. Abstract We present an improved Foreign Function Interface (FFI) for R to call arbitary na- tive functions without the need for C wrapper Foreign function interfaces code. Further we discuss a dynamic linkage framework for binding standard C libraries to FFIs provide the backbone of a language to inter- R across platforms using a universal type infor- face with foreign code. Depending on the design of mation format. The package rdyncall comprises this service, it can largely unburden developers from the framework and an initial repository of cross- writing additional wrapper code. In this section, we platform bindings for standard libraries such as compare the built-in R FFI with that provided by (legacy and modern) OpenGL, the family of SDL rdyncall. We use a simple example that sketches the libraries and Expat. The package enables system- different work flow paths for making an R binding to level programming using the R language; sam- a function from a foreign C library. ple applications are given in the article. We out- line the underlying automation tool-chain that extracts cross-platform bindings from C headers, FFI of base R making the repository extendable and open for Suppose that we wish to invoke the C function sqrt library developers. of the Standard C Math library. The function is de- clared as follows in C: Introduction double sqrt(double x); We present an improved Foreign Function Interface The .C function from the base R FFI offers a call (FFI) for R that significantly reduces the amount of gate to C code with very strict conversion rules, and C wrapper code needed to interface with C.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Garbage Collector for Hashlink and Its Formal Verification
    MEng Individual Project Imperial College London Department of Computing Modern garbage collector for HashLink and its formal verification Supervisor: Prof. Susan Eisenbach Author: Aurel Bílý Second Marker: Prof. Sophia Drossopoulou June 15, 2020 Abstract Haxe [1] is a high-level programming language that compiles code into a number of targets, including other programming languages and bytecode formats. Hash- Link [2] is one of these targets: a virtual machine dedicated to Haxe. There is no manual memory management in Haxe, and all of its targets, including HashLink, must have a garbage collector (GC). HashLink’s current GC implementation, a vari- ant of mark-and-sweep, is slow, as shown in GC-bound benchmarks. Immix [3] is a GC algorithm originally developed for Jikes RVM [4]. It is a good alternative to mark-and-sweep because it requires minimal changes to the inter- face, it has a very fast allocation algorithm, and its collection is optimised for CPU memory caching. We implement an Immix-based GC for HashLink. We demonstrate significant performance improvements of HashLink with the new GC in a variety of benchmarks. We also formalise our GC algorithm with an abstract model defined in Coq [5], and then prove that our implementation correctly implements this model using VST-Floyd [6] and CompCert [7]. We make the con- nection between the abstract model and VST-Floyd assertions in a novel way, suit- able to complex programs with a large state. Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank Lily for her never-ending support and patience. I would like to thank my supervisor, Susan, for the great advice and intellectu- ally stimulating discussions over the years, as well as for allowing me to pursue a project close to my heart.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Legacy Fortran Code Type Safe Through Automated Program Transformation
    The Journal of Supercomputing https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-03839-9 Making legacy Fortran code type safe through automated program transformation Wim Vanderbauwhede1 Accepted: 21 April 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract Fortran is still widely used in scientifc computing, and a very large corpus of legacy as well as new code is written in FORTRAN 77. In general this code is not type safe, so that incorrect programs can compile without errors. In this paper, we pre- sent a formal approach to ensure type safety of legacy Fortran code through auto- mated program transformation. The objective of this work is to reduce programming errors by guaranteeing type safety. We present the frst rigorous analysis of the type safety of FORTRAN 77 and the novel program transformation and type checking algorithms required to convert FORTRAN 77 subroutines and functions into pure, side-efect free subroutines and functions in Fortran 90. We have implemented these algorithms in a source-to-source compiler which type checks and automati- cally transforms the legacy code. We show that the resulting code is type safe and that the pure, side-efect free and referentially transparent subroutines can readily be ofoaded to accelerators. Keywords Fortran · Type safety · Type system · Program transformation · Acceleration 1 Introduction 1.1 The enduring appeal of Fortran The Fortran programming language has a long history. It was originally proposed by John Backus in 1957 for the purpose of facilitating scientifc programming, and has since become widely adopted amongst scientists, and been shown to be an efective language for use in supercomputing.
    [Show full text]