February 2017 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo bootstrap with Ring and Calypso

by Tudor Girba

Great work! Doru > On Feb 24, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have published a short video of the Pharo bootstrapping from a Ring model that is browsed and modified by the Calypso browser. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QguZSPKo7-w > > No audio, please enable subtitles for the description. > > Cheers, > -- Pavel -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Every thing should have the right to be different."

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by David Leibs

http://www.erights.org/elang/quasi/overview.html Provides very good background for quasi-liberals. As to macros I would posit that you have been using them in Smalltalk80 all along without the benefit of having the capability for yourself. There are a classic set of selectors that get special processing by the compiler. "to: do:" is an example of one. It gets turned into a while loop by AST transformation. These special selectors that are really macros are known to the compiler in a special table. A proper macro system opens the capability up everyone. As to 30 years without noticing that they were needed, I would say they are long over due. I needed them back in 1997 when Adele Goldberg and I had a company called Neometron. We used them for for a large system that had thousands of templates that had escapes to code (both Smalltalk80 and SQL) embedded within. We did not want string concatenation style coding with errors only found at run time. By having a Smalltalk80 with macros and quasi-literal little languages we compiled method by method in the browser as usual but all the errors in template or sql syntax were found at compile time. The compile time processing also allowed for an order of magnitude performance increase because there was a lot of evaluation done in advance. By doing the work properly in the parser and compiler and making sure code transformations tracked source code offsets proper single stepping in the debugger was preserved. Of course if aggressive rewriting was done you sometimes have to debug in the expansion but code can be emitted that can often help a macro aware debugger. Sadly, I was unable to convince Eliot and Steve Dahl to incorporate the work into Visualworks 20 years ago. Also sadly, I don't spend a lot of effort arguing with people that don't understand the need for some technology I see as useful. :-) For more examples I suggest taking a look at 60 years of Lisp. Stochastic sampeling of the corpus should be revealing. :-) Simple quasi-literally are relatively easy. A real macro system takes careful design that leads to compiler plugins that can go way beyond macros and open up a world of designer application dependent optimizations. On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:47 AM stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: > Hi david > > What you describe is a bit scary. > Because this is just changing the syntax but it is probably also breaking > refactorings and probably > other. > > May I ask why would we need macros since after more than 30 years nobody > really need them. > > So do you have good motivating cases for > quasi quotes > Opal supports compile time evaluation. > Stef > > > The ES6 design is sound and if you are in a hurry to get the capability > > it > > is a great way to go. Once you start using it and get a taste for > > quasi-literal little languages you will find that you want more. > > > > Having a quasi-literal that let's you name the little language to parse > > you > > open a very interesting door. After the dust settles you need a parser > > and > > compiler framework that allows plugins at every stage. You "MUST" have a > > rich and stable AST and it must be usable as a quasi-literal because > > transpilers abound. You wind up with transpiler code that is templated > > and > > quite "Lispy". > > > > At the end of the day you will finally let in Macros. I believe thatJulia > > got all this right. They stick a "@" in front of their macro invocations > > so > > you get rid of a lot of confusion. David Moon made the Julia macro > > system a > > thing of true beauty. Perfection actually. > > > > At the end of the day you want Smalltalk Compile Time "Staged Meta > > Evaluation". > > > > Still, at a minimum go with the ES6 design. Consider "<|" because " ` " > > is > > hard to see. Some fonts do a terrible job with it. You could do both. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > > http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc-Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp46670… > > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > > Nabble.com. > > > > > -- > Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo bootstrap with Ring and Calypso

by Igor Stasenko

Hmm.. what causing such huge computation cost? Half an hour to bootstrap 600k.. sounds like unrealistically high. All you need to do is to build a graph in memory and then serialize it.. so what it does extra to make it so slow? On 28 February 2017 at 15:03, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > yes this is cool :) > > There is also a new smart student that will work on this infrastructure a > bit to make it "normal developer friendly", you know, hiding some > implementation details, making maybe a UI for the process and so on. > > Now, about the questions: > > - And how much smaller could the image get if the class builder was > removed? > > Well, as Pavel says, you can get for example 10K. You can get even less > if you tweak it manually. Around 10k is the minimal required by the VM to > run a full featured image (at least in cog 32 bits, I did not measure it in > Spur). Imagine that the VM requires at least: > * one process scheduler > * one process in that scheduler > * one context on that process > * one method on that context > > Then, the VM requires some information to interact with the runtime, > e.g., > * what is the selector used for doesNotUnderstand: (yes, we can > change it!) > * what are the first 256 character objects in the Character flyweight > * what is the class of SmallInteger immediate instances > * some special/optimized selectors > > My automatic process generated a somewhat 10k of objects required for > this VM/image interaction. > > Of course this list changes a bit with Spur, and could be reduced (for > example, if you don't use characters, you wouldn't need the character > flyweight and so on...) > > - Is it future approach for bootstrap? (with respect to the 10k image) > > Well, if you read my thesis, what I'm doing there is to lazily pick what > classes and methods will go inside an image. While this is nice to > experiment, I do not think It's a good approach for bootstrapping: > * you need to exercise/execute all possible cases your image needs to > support > * and that means you need to know all those cases in advance > * and that you have to be careful with side effects > > Otherwise, code not executed is not taken in the resulting image. > > Also take the fact that changing a little line of code may result in > bootstrapping an image a couple of times bigger because of a wrong > dependency. > > All these points make this approach less reproducible and a bit more > complicated. I prefer an explicit list of packages to bootstrap, that we > can control and really test the output :) > > Also, as Igor says, we could be able to generate an image without a class > builder, as we are able to generate an image without a compiler. But we do > not want to. Because that is an image that we cannot almost interact with. > We cannot load code inside. So the more interesting question is where is > the balance between space and functionality. > > BTW Pavel, this approach may need to be updated but I think we could make > it run on top of the simulator also ;). > > - How faster or slower bootstrap process with it? > > They are not really comparable. They do not use the same infrastructure, > nor the same process, and they do not generate the same results. > The 10k image is of course generated in a matter of seconds, but a 600k > image containing the seaside counter may take half an hour. > > In our current approach, the speed of bootstrap is directly related to > the number of classes and methods inside the result. There are two ways to > speed up the process: > - by speeding up the ast interpreter (or replacing it by a compiled > version of it) > - and by cleaning the kernel > > > > Guille > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 24 February 2017 at 21:01, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> 2017-02-24 17:17 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> 2017-02-24 16:36 GMT+01:00 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> The "guest" object memory runs in a special virtual machine simulator >>>>> during the bootstrapping. That simulator uses AST Interpreter to execute >>>>> the code inside the guest environment before it is installed for real. It >>>>> uses own special kind of proxies and tricks to do it. The current bootstrap >>>>> cannot run without class builder in the guest environment, but... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> And how much smaller could the image get if the class builder was >>>>>> removed. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ...Guille in his thesis tried different approaches and he was able to >>>>> produce extremely small images (~10 KiB) that did for example only a sum >>>>> of two numbers. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Is it future approach for bootstrap? >>>> How faster or slower bootstrap process with it? >>>> >>> >>> That's more question for Guille, but I do not think we will adopt this >>> approach of bootstrapping in near future because it needs to be updated for >>> the Spur format and it needs a special VM modifications. And the question >>> is how much is it really needed because if you want to do something with >>> the image, you will anyway need most of methods needed for the class >>> builder like basic strings and collections support. >>> >>> >> I think, you can shrink image even more, by running something after >> booting it to remove ClassBuilder & co, if you don't need to create classes >> etc. >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by Eliot Miranda

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:23 AM, DavidLeibs <david.leibs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The ES6 design is sound and if you are in a hurry to get the capability it > is a great way to go. Once you start using it and get a taste for > quasi-literal little languages you will find that you want more. > > Having a quasi-literal that let's you name the little language to parse you > open a very interesting door. After the dust settles you need a parser and > compiler framework that allows plugins at every stage. You "MUST" have a > rich and stable AST and it must be usable as a quasi-literal because > transpilers abound. You wind up with transpiler code that is templated and > quite "Lispy". > > At the end of the day you will finally let in Macros. I believe thatJulia > got all this right. They stick a "@" in front of their macro invocations so > you get rid of a lot of confusion. David Moon made the Julia macro system a > thing of true beauty. Perfection actually. > > At the end of the day you want Smalltalk Compile Time "Staged Meta > Evaluation". > > Still, at a minimum go with the ES6 design. Consider "<|" because " ` " is > hard to see. Some fonts do a terrible job with it. You could do both. > Agreed, and ` (back tick) is used in PetitParser for quasi-quote, so it would be lovely not to collide with it. > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc- > Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp4667088p4936429.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > -- _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by stepharong

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 19:30:21 +0100, DavidLeibs <david.leibs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > As to the characters I did backquote for simple quasi-literal Strings and > used Oxford Brackets for the quasi-literals with a language namespace. <| > ...|>. Back quote can be hard to see but is nice for String substitute. what is a language namespace? -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by stepharong

Hi David Where can we find - motivation - examples - implementation Did you write a report or something that we can read and assess? Tx > I realize this is a few years old but I wanted to give an update on my > quest > for quasi-literals. I did a complete quasi-literal framework for Java > when > I moved over to Oracle Labs. It used the annotation compiler + a few > tweeks > to the scanner and parser. You could extend the name space of the > quasi-literal and have inline SQL or APL. All the parsing, validation, > and > code rewriting happened at compile time. We proposed it to the Java > Product > guys and got ignored to death. > > As to the characters I did backquote for simple quasi-literal Strings and > used Oxford Brackets for the quasi-literals with a language namespace. <| > ...|>. Back quote can be hard to see but is nice for String substitute. > > At this point in time the language that does it most right is JavaScript. > Thanks Mark Miller for all the hard work over the years! > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc-Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp46670… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by stepharong

Hi david What you describe is a bit scary. Because this is just changing the syntax but it is probably also breaking refactorings and probably other. May I ask why would we need macros since after more than 30 years nobody really need them. So do you have good motivating cases for quasi quotes Opal supports compile time evaluation. Stef > The ES6 design is sound and if you are in a hurry to get the capability > it > is a great way to go. Once you start using it and get a taste for > quasi-literal little languages you will find that you want more. > > Having a quasi-literal that let's you name the little language to parse > you > open a very interesting door. After the dust settles you need a parser > and > compiler framework that allows plugins at every stage. You "MUST" have a > rich and stable AST and it must be usable as a quasi-literal because > transpilers abound. You wind up with transpiler code that is templated > and > quite "Lispy". > > At the end of the day you will finally let in Macros. I believe thatJulia > got all this right. They stick a "@" in front of their macro invocations > so > you get rid of a lot of confusion. David Moon made the Julia macro > system a > thing of true beauty. Perfection actually. > > At the end of the day you want Smalltalk Compile Time "Staged Meta > Evaluation". > > Still, at a minimum go with the ES6 design. Consider "<|" because " ` " > is > hard to see. Some fonts do a terrible job with it. You could do both. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc-Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp46670… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

by DavidLeibs

The ES6 design is sound and if you are in a hurry to get the capability it is a great way to go. Once you start using it and get a taste for quasi-literal little languages you will find that you want more. Having a quasi-literal that let's you name the little language to parse you open a very interesting door. After the dust settles you need a parser and compiler framework that allows plugins at every stage. You "MUST" have a rich and stable AST and it must be usable as a quasi-literal because transpilers abound. You wind up with transpiler code that is templated and quite "Lispy". At the end of the day you will finally let in Macros. I believe thatJulia got all this right. They stick a "@" in front of their macro invocations so you get rid of a lot of confusion. David Moon made the Julia macro system a thing of true beauty. Perfection actually. At the end of the day you want Smalltalk Compile Time "Staged Meta Evaluation". Still, at a minimum go with the ES6 design. Consider "<|" because " ` " is hard to see. Some fonts do a terrible job with it. You could do both. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc-Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp46670… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Feb. 28, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] REMEMBER: Tomorrow 28/02 16h UTC TechTalk: Reflectivity

by Peter Uhnak

This site should be automatically time-zone aware https://a.chronus.eu/17A7E60 On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:50:41PM +0800, Ben Coman wrote: > Can we have a link and a countdown? > cheers -ben > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:59 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > It will be handled by Marcus who will present current status of > > Reflectivity integration. > > > > Esteban > > > > > >

Feb. 28, 2017

Pharo TechTalk starting in one hour (16UTC) (LINKS)

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, So, techtalk will be here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H52MAu_ISgU <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H52MAu_ISgU> and discussion channel will be through discord, as always, here: http://discord.gg/Sj2rhxn <http://discord.gg/Sj2rhxn> See you there! Esteban

Feb. 28, 2017