Changes in doc/proposals/concurrency/text/cforall.tex [d67cdb7:3628765]

File:

• doc/proposals/concurrency/text/cforall.tex (modified) (3 diffs)

doc/proposals/concurrency/text/cforall.tex

@@ -5 +5 @@
 % ======================================================================
 
-As mentionned in the introduction, the document presents the design for the concurrency features in \CFA. Since it is a new language here is a quick review of the language specifically tailored to the features needed to support concurrency.
+This thesis presents the design for a set of concurrency features in \CFA. Since it is a new dialect of C, the following is a quick introduction to the language, specifically tailored to the features needed to support concurrency.
 
-\CFA is a extension of ISO C and therefore supports much of the same paradigms as C. It is a non-object oriented system level language, meaning it has very most of the major abstractions have either no runtime cost or can be opt-out easily. Like C, the basics of \CFA revolve around structures and routines, which are thin abstractions over assembly. The vast majority of the code produced by a \CFA compiler respects memory-layouts and calling-conventions laid out by C. However, while \CFA is not an object-oriented language according to a strict definition. It does have some notion of objects, most importantly construction and destruction of objects. Most of the following pieces of code can be found as is on the \CFA website : \cite{www-cfa}
+\CFA is a extension of ISO-C and therefore supports all of the same paradigms as C. It is a non-object oriented system language, meaning most of the major abstractions have either no runtime overhead or can be opt-out easily. Like C, the basics of \CFA revolve around structures and routines, which are thin abstractions over machine code. The vast majority of the code produced by the \CFA translator respects memory-layouts and calling-conventions laid out by C. Interestingly, while \CFA is not an object-oriented language, lacking the concept of a received (e.g.: this), it does have some notion of objects\footnote{C defines the term objects as : [Where to I get the C11 reference manual?]}, most importantly construction and destruction of objects. Most of the following pieces of code can be found on the \CFA website \cite{www-cfa}
 
 \section{References}
 
-Like \CC, \CFA introduces references as an alternative to pointers. In regards to concurrency, the semantics difference between pointers and references aren't particularly relevant but since this document uses mostly references here is a quick overview of the semantics :
+Like \CC, \CFA introduces references as an alternative to pointers. In regards to concurrency, the semantics difference between pointers and references are not particularly relevant but since this document uses mostly references here is a quick overview of the semantics :
 \begin{cfacode}
 int x, *p1 = &x, **p2 = &p1, ***p3 = &p2,
 &r1 = x,    &&r2 = r1,   &&&r3 = r2;
-***p3 = 3;                              // change x
-r3 = 3;                                 // change x, ***r3
-**p3 = ...;                             // change p1
-&r3 = ...;                              // change r1, (&*)**r3
-*p3 = ...;                              // change p2
-&&r3 = ...;                             // change r2, (&(&*)*)*r3
-&&&r3 = p3;                             // change r3 to p3, (&(&(&*)*)*)r3
-int y, z, & ar[3] = { x, y, z };        // initialize array of references
-&ar[1] = &z;                            // change reference array element
-typeof( ar[1] ) p;                      // is int, i.e., the type of referenced object
-typeof( &ar[1] ) q;                     // is int &, i.e., the type of reference
-sizeof( ar[1] ) == sizeof( int );       // is true, i.e., the size of referenced object
-sizeof( &ar[1] ) == sizeof( int *);     // is true, i.e., the size of a reference
+***p3 = 3;                                                      //change x
+r3    = 3;                                                      //change x, ***r3
+**p3  = ...;                                            //change p1
+*p3   = ...;                                            //change p2
+int y, z, & ar[3] = {x, y, z};          //initialize array of references
+typeof( ar[1]) p;                                       //is int, i.e., the type of referenced object
+typeof(&ar[1]) q;                                       //is int &, i.e., the type of reference
+sizeof( ar[1]) == sizeof(int);          //is true, i.e., the size of referenced object
+sizeof(&ar[1]) == sizeof(int *);        //is true, i.e., the size of a reference
 \end{cfacode}
 The important thing to take away from this code snippet is that references offer a handle to an object much like pointers but which is automatically derefferenced when convinient.
@@ -33 +29 @@
 \section{Overloading}
 
-Another important feature \CFA has in common with \CC is function overloading :
+Another important feature of \CFA is function overloading as in Java and \CC, where routine with the same name are selected based on the numbers and type of the arguments. As well, \CFA uses the return type as part of the selection criteria, as in Ada\cite{Ada}. For routines with multiple parameters and returns, the selection is complex.
 \begin{cfacode}
-// selection based on type and number of parameters
-void f( void );                         // (1)
-void f( char );                         // (2)
-void f( int, double );                  // (3)
-f();                                    // select (1)
-f( 'a' );                               // select (2)
-f( 3, 5.2 );                            // select (3)
+//selection based on type and number of parameters
+void f(void);                   //(1)
+void f(char);                   //(2)
+void f(int, double);    //(3)
+f();                                    //select (1)
+f('a');                                 //select (2)
+f(3, 5.2);                              //select (3)
 
-// selection based on  type and number of returns
-char f( int );                          // (1)
-double f( int );                        // (2)
-[ int, double ] f( int );               // (3)
-char c = f( 3 );                        // select (1)
-double d = f( 4 );                      // select (2)
-[ int, double ] t = f( 5 );             // select (3)
+//selection based on  type and number of returns
+char   f(int);                  //(1)
+double f(int);                  //(2)
+char   c = f(3);                //select (1)
+double d = f(4);                //select (2)
 \end{cfacode}
-This feature is particularly important for concurrency since the runtime system relies on creating different types do represent concurrency objects. Therefore, overloading is necessary to prevent the need for long prefixes and other naming conventions that prevent clashes. As seen in chapter \ref{basics}, the main is an example of routine that benefits from overloading when concurrency in introduced.
+This feature is particularly important for concurrency since the runtime system relies on creating different types to represent concurrency objects. Therefore, overloading is necessary to prevent the need for long prefixes and other naming conventions that prevent name clashes. As seen in chapter \ref{basics}, routines main is an example that benefits from overloading.
 
 \section{Operators}
 Overloading also extends to operators. The syntax for denoting operator-overloading is to name a routine with the symbol of the operator and question marks where the arguments of the operation would be, like so :
 \begin{cfacode}
-int ++?( int op );                      // unary prefix increment
-int ?++( int op );                      // unary postfix increment
-int ?+?( int op1, int op2 );            // binary plus
-int ?<=?( int op1, int op2 );           // binary less than
-int ?=?( int & op1, int op2 );          // binary assignment
-int ?+=?( int & op1, int op2 );         // binary plus-assignment
+int ++? (int op);                       //unary prefix increment
+int ?++ (int op);                       //unary postfix increment
+int ?+? (int op1, int op2);             //binary plus
+int ?<=?(int op1, int op2);             //binary less than
+int ?=? (int & op1, int op2);           //binary assignment
+int ?+=?(int & op1, int op2);           //binary plus-assignment
 
-struct S { int i, j; };
-S ?+?( S op1, S op2 ) {                 // add two structures
-        return (S){ op1.i + op2.i, op1.j + op2.j };
+struct S {int i, j;};
+S ?+?(S op1, S op2) {                           //add two structures
+        return (S){op1.i + op2.i, op1.j + op2.j};
 }
-S s1 = { 1, 2 }, s2 = { 2, 3 }, s3;
-s3 = s1 + s2;                           // compute sum: s3 == { 2, 5 }
+S s1 = {1, 2}, s2 = {2, 3}, s3;
+s3 = s1 + s2;                                           //compute sum: s3 == {2, 5}
 \end{cfacode}
-
-Since concurrency does not use operator overloading, this feature is more important as an introduction for the syntax of constructors.
+While concurrency does not use operator overloading directly, this feature is more important as an introduction for the syntax of constructors.
 
 \section{Constructors/Destructors}
-Object life time is often a challenge in concurrency. \CFA uses the approach of giving concurrent meaning to object life time as a mean of synchronization and/or mutual exclusion. Since \CFA relies heavily on the life time of objects, Constructors \& Destructors are a the core of the features required for concurrency and parallelism. \CFA uses the following syntax for constructors and destructors :
+Object life-time is often a challenge in concurrency. \CFA uses the approach of giving concurrent meaning to object life-time as a mean of synchronization and/or mutual exclusion. Since \CFA relies heavily on the life time of objects, constructors and destructors are a core feature required for concurrency and parallelism. \CFA uses the following syntax for constructors and destructors :
 \begin{cfacode}
 struct S {
@@ -80 +73 @@
         int * ia;
 };
-void ?{}( S & s, int asize ) with s {   // constructor operator
-        size = asize;                   // initialize fields
-        ia = calloc( size, sizeof( S ) );
+void ?{}(S & s, int asize) {    //constructor operator
+        s.size = asize;                         //initialize fields
+        s.ia = calloc(size, sizeof(S));
 }
-void ^?{}( S & s ) with s {             // destructor operator
-        free( ia );                     // de-initialization fields
+void ^?{}(S & s) {                              //destructor operator
+        free(ia);                                       //de-initialization fields
 }
 int main() {
-        S x = { 10 }, y = { 100 };      // implict calls: ?{}( x, 10 ), ?{}( y, 100 )
-        ...                             // use x and y
-        ^x{};  ^y{};                    // explicit calls to de-initialize
-        x{ 20 };  y{ 200 };             // explicit calls to reinitialize
-        ...                             // reuse x and y
-}                                       // implict calls: ^?{}( y ), ^?{}( x )
+        S x = {10}, y = {100};          //implict calls: ?{}(x, 10), ?{}(y, 100)
+        ...                                                     //use x and y
+        ^x{};  ^y{};                            //explicit calls to de-initialize
+        x{20};  y{200};                         //explicit calls to reinitialize
+        ...                                                     //reuse x and y
+}                                                               //implict calls: ^?{}(y), ^?{}(x)
 \end{cfacode}
-The language guarantees that every object and all their fields are constructed. Like \CC construction is automatically done on declaration and destruction done when the declared variables reach the end of its scope.
+The language guarantees that every object and all their fields are constructed. Like \CC, construction of an object is automatically done on allocation and destruction of the object is done on deallocation. Allocation and deallocation can occur on the stack or on the heap.
+\begin{cfacode}
+{
+        struct S s = {10};      //allocation, call constructor
+        ...
+}                                               //deallocation, call destructor
+struct S * s = new();   //allocation, call constructor
+...
+delete(s);                              //deallocation, call destructor
+\end{cfacode}
+Note that like \CC, \CFA introduces \code{new} and \code{delete}, which behave like \code{malloc} and \code{free} in addition to constructing and destructing objects, after calling \code{malloc} and before calling \code{free} respectively.
 
-For more information see \cite{cforall-ug,rob-thesis,www-cfa}.
+\section{Parametric Polymorphism}
+Routines in \CFA can also be reused for multiple types. This is done using the \code{forall} clause which gives \CFA it's name. \code{forall} clauses allow seperatly compiled routines to support generic usage over multiple types. For example, the following sum function will work for any type which support construction from 0 and addition :
+\begin{cfacode}
+//constraint type, 0 and +
+forall(otype T | { void ?{}(T *, zero_t); T ?+?(T, T); })
+T sum(T a[ ], size_t size) {
+        T total = 0;                            //construct T from 0
+        for(size_t i = 0; i < size; i++)
+                total = total + a[i];   //select appropriate +
+        return total;
+}
+
+S sa[5];
+int i = sum(sa, 5);                             //use S's 0 construction and +
+\end{cfacode}
+
+Since writing constraints on types can become cumbersome for more constrained functions, \CFA also has the concept of traits. Traits are named collection of constraints which can be used both instead and in addition to regular constraints:
+\begin{cfacode}
+trait sumable( otype T ) {
+        void ?{}(T *, zero_t);          //constructor from 0 literal
+        T ?+?(T, T);                            //assortment of additions
+        T ?+=?(T *, T);
+        T ++?(T *);
+        T ?++(T *);
+};
+forall( otype T | sumable(T) )  //use trait
+T sum(T a[], size_t size);
+\end{cfacode}
+
+\section{with Clause/Statement}
+Since \CFA lacks the concept of a receiver, certain functions end-up needing to repeat variable names often, to solve this \CFA offers the \code{with} statement which opens an aggregate scope making its fields directly accessible (like Pascal).
+\begin{cfacode}
+struct S { int i, j; };
+int mem(S & this) with this             //with clause
+        i = 1;                                          //this->i
+        j = 2;                                          //this->j
+}
+int foo() {
+        struct S1 { ... } s1;
+        struct S2 { ... } s2;
+        with s1                                         //with statement
+        {
+                //access fields of s1
+                //without qualification
+                with s2                                 //nesting
+                {
+                        //access fields of s1 and s2
+                        //without qualification
+                }
+        }
+        with s1, s2                             //scopes open in parallel
+        {
+                //access fields of s1 and s2
+                //without qualification
+        }
+}
+\end{cfacode}
+
+For more information on \CFA see \cite{cforall-ug,rob-thesis,www-cfa}.