Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl forth 
Sujet : Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines
De : anton (at) *nospam* mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Groupes : comp.lang.forth
Date : 10. Feb 2025, 00:08:22
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID : <2025Feb10.000822@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : xrn 10.11
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
The :}D means that the closure data is stored in the dictionary; there
is also :}L (for locals, deallocated when the surrounding definition
is exited), :}H (heap, deallocated with FREE-CLOSURE), and :}H1 (heap,
deallocated right after the first (and only) execution).
>
This is pretty cool, but it looks like quotations within the closure
aren't allowed to access the closure's locals

Correct.  You need to use a closure (and perform closure conversion
and assignment conversion manually, if needed).

This is an attempt to make a counting function, like in Scheme:
>
(define (x)
 ((lambda (n)
   (lambda ()
     (set! n (+ 1 n))
     n)) 0))
>
(define a (x))
>
(a)  ; 1
(a)  ; 2, etc.

: x ( -- xt )
  here 0 , [{: addr :}d addr @ 1+ dup addr ! ;] ;

x alias a
x alias b
a . \ 1
a . \ 2
b . \ 1
a . \ 3

Given that you are using dictionary allocation, traditional Forth
allocation for the mutable data is fine.  There is also a syntax for
allocating data in other locations, but you don't need it with
dictionary allocation and traditional dictionary allocation is usually
shorter.  With that syntax the equivalent would be:

: x ( -- xt )
  0 <{: w^ n :}d n ;> drop [{: n :}d n @ 1+ dup n ! ;] ;

The other issue is that the value-flavoured local N or ADDR in the
closure cannot be changed in a way that takes effect outside the
closure.  So you give an address to it, and use @, ! etc. to work on
that (assignment conversion).

It would be interesting if your conservative gc could be made reliable
and included with gforth, and then another suffix could be added to put
closure locals in the gc'd heap.

Yes.  There is :}xt for passing an xt that performs the allocation.

See <https://gforth.org/manual/Closures.html> for all of these topics.
Or read the paper:

@InProceedings{ertl&paysan18,
  author =       {M. Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan},
  title =        {Closures --- the {Forth} way},
  crossref =     {euroforth18},
  pages =        {17--30},
  url =          {https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/papers/ertl%26paysan.pdf},
  url2 =         {http://www.euroforth.org/ef18/papers/ertl.pdf},
  slides-url =   {http://www.euroforth.org/ef18/papers/ertl-slides.pdf},
  video = {https://wiki.forth-ev.de/doku.php/events:ef2018:closures},
  OPTnote =      {refereed},
  abstract =     {In Forth 200x, a quotation cannot access a local
                  defined outside it, and therefore cannot be
                  parameterized in the definition that produces its
                  execution token.  We present Forth closures; they
                  lift this restriction with minimal implementation
                  complexity.  They are based on passing parameters on
                  the stack when producing the execution token.  The
                  programmer has to explicitly manage the memory of
                  the closure.  We show a number of usage examples.
                  We also present the current implementation, which
                  takes 109~source lines of code (including some extra
                  features).  The programmer can mechanically convert
                  lexical scoping (accessing a local defined outside)
                  into code using our closures, by applying assignment
                  conversion and flat-closure conversion.  The result
                  can do everything one expects from closures,
                  including passing Knuth's man-or-boy test and living
                  beyond the end of their enclosing definitions.}
}

 Also in a threaded
program I guess it would have to stop any threads that shared a GC'd
heap during collection of that heap.

That's a tough one.  My current thinking is along the lines of a
per-thread allocator and garbage-collector, with no heap-allocated
data passed between threads.  Then thread-unaware GCs are good enough.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: https://forth-standard.org/
EuroForth 2023 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef23/papers/
EuroForth 2024 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef24/papers/

Date Sujet#  Auteur
31 Jan 25 * Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines91dxf
31 Jan 25 +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Anton Ertl
31 Jan 25 +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
31 Jan 25 +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines14Hans Bezemer
1 Feb 25 i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines13dxf
1 Feb 25 i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines12Anton Ertl
1 Feb 25 i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4dxf
1 Feb 25 i  i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
1 Feb 25 i  i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i  i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i  `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7dxf
2 Feb 25 i   `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines6Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i    +- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i    +* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i    i`- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Bernd Linsel
6 Feb 25 i    `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Waldek Hebisch
6 Feb 25 i     `- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
1 Feb 25 +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines70Ruvim
2 Feb 25 i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i+* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Paul Rubin
3 Feb 25 ii`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
3 Feb 25 i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines66Ruvim
3 Feb 25 i +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines57albert
3 Feb 25 i i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines56Paul Rubin
4 Feb 25 i i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines55albert
6 Feb 25 i i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2HenryHH
6 Feb 25 i i  i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
6 Feb 25 i i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines52minforth
6 Feb 25 i i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2albert
6 Feb 25 i i   i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
6 Feb 25 i i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines49Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines48minforth
6 Feb 25 i i     +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines19dxf
6 Feb 25 i i     i+* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     ii`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
6 Feb 25 i i     i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines16Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i     i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines14dxf
7 Feb 25 i i     i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i  i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
8 Feb 25 i i     i  `* quotations (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)11Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i   +* Re: quotations9dxf
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i+* Re: quotations4Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii`* Re: quotations3dxf
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii `* Re: quotations2Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii  `- Re: quotations1minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i`* Re: quotations4Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i +- Re: quotations1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i `* Re: quotations2dxf
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i  `- Re: quotations1albert
9 Feb 25 i i     i   `- Re: quotations (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)1albert
6 Feb 25 i i     +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines27Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i     i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines25minforth
8 Feb 25 i i     i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines24Anton Ertl
8 Feb 25 i i     i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines19Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Paul Rubin
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
10 Feb 25 i i     i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines15Anton Ertl
10 Feb 25 i i     i    +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines8ahmed
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7Anton Ertl
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1ahmed
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3mhx
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Paul Rubin
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines6Paul Rubin
11 Feb 25 i i     i     `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines5minforth
11 Feb 25 i i     i      `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4Paul Rubin
12 Feb 25 i i     i       +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
12 Feb 25 i i     i       `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
14 Feb 25 i i     i        `- Multi-Tasking (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)1Anton Ertl
7 Feb 25 i i     `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
22 Mar 25 i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines8sjack
23 Mar 25 i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7dxf
23 Mar 25 i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2sjack
24 Mar 25 i   i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
24 Mar 25 i   +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
24 Mar 25 i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3dxf
24 Mar 25 i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2dxf
24 Mar 25 i     `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
11 Mar 25 `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4dxf
21 Mar 25  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3dxf
21 Mar 25   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2dxf
22 Mar 25    `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal