September 2014 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by phil＠highoctane.be

Sure, but enough of Smalltalk flavor to not want to go into C. For specific plugins, this is really cool to have. Phil On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:39 PM, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Note that slang is a subset of smalltalk. The Slang compiler does not > allow to compile smalltalk to C. It allows to compile a smalltalk with > restricted message sends and classes to C. > > 2014-09-15 13:28 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com>: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that. >> > >> Two open questions: >> >> - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target? >> > > Yes it would be interesting. However, by having a Slang to C compiler, > we're platform-independent, we can compile the C code to x86, x86_64 and > ARM quite easily (some part of the VM are already processor dependent, but > not so much). Targeting direct machine code implies evolving the Slang > compiler for each new assembly code we support. It sounds like a lot of > engineering work compared to our resources and the gain. > >> >> - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest? >> >> If you compile the C code with Clang instead of gcc, which starts to be > the case because of the lack of support for gcc in the latest Mac OS X, you > are already using LLVM IR because Clang uses it. As the VM use the GNU C > extensions to improve performance, I do not think that targeting directly > the LLVM IR would greatly improve performance. So it sounds like quite some > engineering work for no gain. > > However, I think Ronie was interested in doing such work. If he succeeds > and reports performance improvement, then we can consider using his > compiler to compile the VM. > > >> Thierry >> >> 2014-09-15 12:29 GMT+02:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >> >> Slang has been externalized by Pavel. So, Smalltalk to C works. >>> >>> Works nicely, even if there were a few glitches (like code generated >>> twice at one point). >>> Nothing unfixable, I got the beast working. >>> >>> Allows for things like: write Slang, generate C, compile into DLL, load >>> DLL, run C code. All in a single shot. >>> >>> PavelKrivanek/CCodeGenerator on SmalltalkHub (which looks like super >>> slow/zombified). >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo < >>> santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is >>>> the pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. >>>> >>>> Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project >>>> related with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit >>>>> parser or other parsers offer such support ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2014-09-15 13:56 GMT+02:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Thierry Goubier < >> thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Phil, >>> >>> thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that. >>> >>> Two open questions: >>> >>> - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target? >>> >> >> I have to admit that I am happy to have Slang to C and it gets out of my >> competence from there :-) >> > > Yes, I believe it is very cool as it is. You need a full C toolchain > around to make it work. > > >> >> Now, Slang to asm, that's quite a chasm to cross. If what asm does is >> doing syscalls, well, I don't see the added value right away as NB >> Assembler would do that already no? >> > > Hum, I would more like SSE and AVX code done this way: matrix > multiplications, bitmap processing, heavily used code, SciSmalltalk stuff > on very large datasets. > Indeed! I'd live to generate some CUDA code from Pharo. But the toolchain goes C code which gets compiled through some "black-hole toolchain" in the NVidia SDK with host and GPU blocks. That's too much to handle for my tastes, so the best is for me to have an engine (or for a better metaphor) and using Pharo to drive/steer/harness it. > To see NB only used as a way to write syscalls :(:(:( > You opened my eyes with the previous comment. Thx. > > >> >> Now, I am on Linux for about all of my Pharo code, so, C is nice enough. >> >> >>> >>> - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest? >>> >> >> Oh, that would be interesting. In order to get the IR interpreter and >> running things all over. Now, this should be extended to the whole VM then. >> But not sure we want that before we get 64 bits... >> > > OpenCL, SPIR code generation and link to Cog. > Indeed! CUDA =-) > > The ability to generate better code than when targetting C. > True too. But aren't those compilers smart enough already? With current CPUs, well, it takes a strong man to do better things than the compiler it seems. Or am I mistaken? > > >> >> Ah, I should have taken the research career :-) >> > > Hum, you know that researchers are allways on the lookout for SMEs to > collaborate on projects :-) > Duly noted :-) Feel free to tickle me :-) > > > Thierry > > Phil

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > Please pay careful attention: this is one of those Pharo libraries that > might not meet industry standard. But, it is so small and elegant that even > an amateur can have a say with it :). > > The interesting thing about the red pill is that the reality that comes > after taking the pill is less clean than the one from before the pill, But, > it is richer! > Exactly!!!! > You can still choose the world you want to live in :) > Get me my box of red pills back :-) Phil > > Doru > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:02 PM, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:39 PM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> WOW this CCodeGenerator is great , I have downloaded it and tried the >>> example and it generated the 'generated.c" file . Awesome !!!! thank you >>> all >>> >> >> Ah ah, happy to have made you day. Yes, Slang is the awesome thing for >> integrating things. You can debug in Pharo, and then compile to C. How cool >> is that? >> >>> >>> Ok how about this visitor thing ? any links to it , no idea what that is >>> and how to use it in pharo. Is it a way to code like continuations ? >>> >> >> Check the FileSystem-Core-Implementation package. >> >> Look at the FileSystemGuide and how ti works, including the >> FileSystemVisitor and its Collect and Select visitors down there. >> >> It is interesting material to get to terms with the Visitor/Guide thing. >> >> I reused/cloned a ton of this code for my current project where I do have >> to navigate network equipement structures and generate probes along the way. >> >> A tad mind twisting at the beginning but very useful once you get it. >> >> Once you have the guide, you can visit all the way you want. Like here, I >> generate HTML tree controls, D3 graphics, SNMP probes etc. >> >> There are samples also for AST, but this is a tad too much for me at the >> moment. >> >> >> >>> About LLVM sound very cool and I was googling about that few hours ago >>> but from what I have read is a very undocumented part of LLVM so that maybe >>> easier said than done. Looks like Pharo is not the only project having >>> issues with documentation ;) >>> >>> So it looks like I will be sticking with Pharo after all :D >>> >> >> Ah, swallowing the red pill is nearing. >> >> Enjoy, >> Phil >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Serge Stinckwich < >>> serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:31 PM, phil(a)highoctane.be < >>>> phil(a)highoctane.be> wrote: >>>> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Serge Stinckwich >>>> > <serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo >>>> >> <santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> > I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. >>>> Is >>>> >> > the >>>> >> > pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project >>>> related >>>> >> > with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. >>>> >> >>>> >> Both are subset of Smalltalk. This is best path to follow I guess: >>>> >> define your own DSL for your needs and implement a visitor to do code >>>> >> generation. >>>> >> We have done that for epidemiological modeling. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Or combine both: visitor which uses CCodeGenerator for emitting the >>>> result. >>>> >>>> Yes, interesting idea, instead of generating strings! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Serge Stinckwich >>>> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) >>>> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk >>>> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by Thierry Goubier

2014-09-15 14:39 GMT+02:00 ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com>: > Hello, > > Note that slang is a subset of smalltalk. The Slang compiler does not > allow to compile smalltalk to C. It allows to compile a smalltalk with > restricted message sends and classes to C. > Yes, I am aware of that. I remember that from the very beginnings of Squeak. Wasn't Smalltalk/X the one which had a more complete version of that C translation? I did an internship in a French company who had a Smalltalk to C translator done for them a long time ago. > > 2014-09-15 13:28 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com>: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that. >> > >> Two open questions: >> >> - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target? >> > > Yes it would be interesting. However, by having a Slang to C compiler, > we're platform-independent, we can compile the C code to x86, x86_64 and > ARM quite easily (some part of the VM are already processor dependent, but > not so much). Targeting direct machine code implies evolving the Slang > compiler for each new assembly code we support. It sounds like a lot of > engineering work compared to our resources and the gain. > It would allow JIT-type compilation experiments than a Slang-to-C chain isn't designed for :) With a lot more work doing the various NB ports, of course. > >> - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest? >> >> If you compile the C code with Clang instead of gcc, which starts to be > the case because of the lack of support for gcc in the latest Mac OS X, you > are already using LLVM IR because Clang uses it. As the VM use the GNU C > extensions to improve performance, I do not think that targeting directly > the LLVM IR would greatly improve performance. So it sounds like quite some > engineering work for no gain. > I would not suggest replacing C by LLVM-IR for VM work, in part because LLVM-IR is not what I would call a readable source code format... But I do know that even when doing C to C rewritting for embedded compilation, there is some low-level code that you can't write in C. > > > However, I think Ronie was interested in doing such work. If he succeeds > and reports performance improvement, then we can consider using his > compiler to compile the VM. > Keep us posted! Thierry

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by Juan

Arduino to c++ /c Best Jmdc El 15/09/2014 09:33, "Santiago Bragagnolo" <santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> escribiÃ³: > Que proyecto?? ?_? > > el que pasa smalltalk a c? estan hablando de slang > > > > 2014-09-15 14:29 GMT+02:00 Juan <smalltalker.marcelo(a)gmail.com>: > >> Hola Santiago >> >> >> Como se llama tal proyecto, me podria ser util podria colaborar >> >> saludos >> >> Juan Marcelo >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo < >> santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is >>> the pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. >>> >>> Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project related >>> with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit >>>> parser or other parsers offer such support ? >>>> >>> >>> >> >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by kilon alios

Yeah I think I mixed it up with something else, anyway I found a very nice tutorial how to make a working compiler with LLVM http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-createcompilerllvm1/index.html http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-createcompilerllvm2/ looks like nativeboost on steroids !!!! On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2014-09-15 13:39 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: > >> >> About LLVM sound very cool and I was googling about that few hours ago >> but from what I have read is a very undocumented part of LLVM so that maybe >> easier said than done. Looks like Pharo is not the only project having >> issues with documentation ;) >> > > LLVM is an industrial-class open source project included in, I believe, > all GPU drivers (for compilation of CUDA and OpenCL code). > > It is also one of the best documented low-level compilation toolkits with > performance to match the other open source compiler (gcc). LLVM-IR is > fairly well documented. > > >> >> So it looks like I will be sticking with Pharo after all :D >> > > :) > > Thierry > >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by ClÃ©ment Bera

Hello, Note that slang is a subset of smalltalk. The Slang compiler does not allow to compile smalltalk to C. It allows to compile a smalltalk with restricted message sends and classes to C. 2014-09-15 13:28 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com>: > Hi Phil, > > thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that. > > Two open questions: > > - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target? > Yes it would be interesting. However, by having a Slang to C compiler, we're platform-independent, we can compile the C code to x86, x86_64 and ARM quite easily (some part of the VM are already processor dependent, but not so much). Targeting direct machine code implies evolving the Slang compiler for each new assembly code we support. It sounds like a lot of engineering work compared to our resources and the gain. > > - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest? > > If you compile the C code with Clang instead of gcc, which starts to be the case because of the lack of support for gcc in the latest Mac OS X, you are already using LLVM IR because Clang uses it. As the VM use the GNU C extensions to improve performance, I do not think that targeting directly the LLVM IR would greatly improve performance. So it sounds like quite some engineering work for no gain. However, I think Ronie was interested in doing such work. If he succeeds and reports performance improvement, then we can consider using his compiler to compile the VM. > Thierry > > 2014-09-15 12:29 GMT+02:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > > Slang has been externalized by Pavel. So, Smalltalk to C works. >> >> Works nicely, even if there were a few glitches (like code generated >> twice at one point). >> Nothing unfixable, I got the beast working. >> >> Allows for things like: write Slang, generate C, compile into DLL, load >> DLL, run C code. All in a single shot. >> >> PavelKrivanek/CCodeGenerator on SmalltalkHub (which looks like super >> slow/zombified). >> >> Phil >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo < >> santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is >>> the pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. >>> >>> Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project related >>> with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit >>>> parser or other parsers offer such support ? >>>> >>> >>> >> >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by Thierry Goubier

2014-09-15 13:56 GMT+02:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Thierry Goubier < > thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> thanks for the update on Slang to C. Allways significant to have that. >> >> Two open questions: >> >> - would a slang to x86 asm via NativeBoost be doable / a nice target? >> > > I have to admit that I am happy to have Slang to C and it gets out of my > competence from there :-) > Yes, I believe it is very cool as it is. You need a full C toolchain around to make it work. > > Now, Slang to asm, that's quite a chasm to cross. If what asm does is > doing syscalls, well, I don't see the added value right away as NB > Assembler would do that already no? > Hum, I would more like SSE and AVX code done this way: matrix multiplications, bitmap processing, heavily used code, SciSmalltalk stuff on very large datasets. To see NB only used as a way to write syscalls :(:(:( > > Now, I am on Linux for about all of my Pharo code, so, C is nice enough. > > >> >> - would targetting LLVM-IR be of interest? >> > > Oh, that would be interesting. In order to get the IR interpreter and > running things all over. Now, this should be extended to the whole VM then. > But not sure we want that before we get 64 bits... > OpenCL, SPIR code generation and link to Cog. The ability to generate better code than when targetting C. > > Ah, I should have taken the research career :-) > Hum, you know that researchers are allways on the lookout for SMEs to collaborate on projects :-) Thierry

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by Santiago Bragagnolo

Que proyecto?? ?_? el que pasa smalltalk a c? estan hablando de slang 2014-09-15 14:29 GMT+02:00 Juan <smalltalker.marcelo(a)gmail.com>: > Hola Santiago > > > Como se llama tal proyecto, me podria ser util podria colaborar > > saludos > > Juan Marcelo > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo < > santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is the >> pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. >> >> Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project related >> with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. >> >> >> >> 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: >> >>> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit >>> parser or other parsers offer such support ? >>> >> >> >

Sept. 15, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Parsing Pharo syntax to C/C++

by Juan

Hola Santiago Como se llama tal proyecto, me podria ser util podria colaborar saludos Juan Marcelo On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Santiago Bragagnolo < santiagobragagnolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I may be wrong, but I think the closest thing out there is Slang. Is the > pseudo smalltalk used to develop the VM. > > Also there is a project for generating C for arduino, (a project related > with EToys), but i am not sure about how complete is. > > > > 2014-09-15 11:04 GMT+02:00 kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>: > >> Is there a way to convert code from pharo to c or c++ ? Does pettit >> parser or other parsers offer such support ? >> > >

Sept. 15, 2014