Compiler basics: Lisp to Assembly
notes.eatonphil.com
notes.eatonphil.com
I can't remember the name of the paper. Any ideas? It was such an elegant way of walking through a compiler implementation.
I'm reaching out for some help from you. I've been working on interpreters this whole year, taking on no more work for pay than needed for rent and food, so that I can realize my programming language dream. I'm writing a couple of interpreters every week, trying out new ideas. But there is one hurdle I've been unable to overcome for a long time.
I'm trying to write a typechecker for a simple lambda calculus with polymorphic functions. My acceptance criteria is being able to typecheck the K combinator. I've been stuck at this point for months. Have read all I can find on the internet, and have read TAPL many times.
Am honestly feeling really stupid for not having been able to complete this.
What I'm struggling with beta reducing expressions that are type lambdas (i.e. the expression related to `Forall`).
Λ means type lambda, i.e. the set of expressions indexed by type
λ means expression lambda, i.e. the set of expressions indexed by expression
E.g. Λa.λx:a.x is the polymorphic "identity" function, which in javascript looks like `x => x`
k = ΛA.ΛB.λx:A.λy:B.x
k_intint = ((k IntTy) IntTy)
What I have yet been unable to do is type_of k_intint, and this because beta reduction should return an expression, but type_of should return a type.
I'll paste the source code of my latest attempt below, the function in question is `typ_of_expression`. I've written this in OCaml, but would be very thankful for a response in any language, or pseudocode, or just explained in English.
Many thanks for taking the time to read this. For any reply or pointer in the right direction I would be greatly thankful. You know what, I'd be happy to pay €100 for any help that lets me solve this (SEPA, Bitcoin).
(* λ calculus, with Forall and simple types *)
type 'a binding =
| SymBind of 'a
| QuantifierBind
type 'a context = (string * 'a binding) list
type typ =
| UnitTy
| IntTy
| Arrow of typ * typ
| Forall of string * typ
(* Thought it simpler to separate Closure and Lambda, for w hen I later add records/unions etc *)
| ClosureTy of (typ context) * typ
| SymbolTy of string
type expr =
(* again thought it simpler to separate Closure and Lambda, for when I later add records/unions etc *)
| Closure of (expr context) * expr
| Unit
| Symbol of string
| Int of int
| Lam of string * typ * expr (* turns into Arrow. Takes ex pr as argument, returns expr *)
| App of expr * expr
| TLam of string * expr (* expr version of Forall. Ta kes typ as argument, returns expr *)
| TApp of expr * typ
let rec lookup context key =
match context with
| [] -> Error "No result"
| (k, QuantifierBind) :: rest -> lookup rest key
| (k, SymBind v) :: rest -> if key = k
then Ok v
else lookup rest key
let str = String.concat ""
let rec string_of_typ t = match t with
| UnitTy -> "UnitTy"
| IntTy -> "IntTy"
| Arrow _ -> "Arrow"
| Forall (s, t) -> str ["Forall "; s; " "; string_of_typ t]
| ClosureTy (_ctx, t) -> str ["Closure "; string_of_typ t]
| SymbolTy s -> str ["SymbolTy "; s]
let string_of_expr e = match e with
| Unit -> "Unit"
| Closure _ -> "Closure"
| Symbol s -> str ["Symbol "; s]
| Int i -> str ["Int "; string_of_int i]
| Lam _ -> "Lam"
| App _ -> "App"
| TLam _ -> "TLam"
| TApp _ -> "TApp"
(* Convert between context types, such as (expr context) or ( typ context) *)
let rec convert_context converter_fn original_context exprcon text acc = (* カリたべたい *)
let convert_context = convert_context converter_fn original _context in
match exprcontext with
| [] -> acc
| (x, QuantifierBind) :: rest ->
convert_context rest ((x, QuantifierBind) :: acc)
| (x, SymBind e) :: rest ->
(match converter_fn original_context e with
| Ok t -> convert_context rest ((x, SymBind t) :: acc)
| Error e -> failwith (str ["typ_context error: "; e]))
let rec typ_of_expr context e =
match e with
| Unit -> Ok UnitTy
| Int i -> Ok IntTy
| Closure (ctx, e) ->
let new_context = convert_context typ_of_expr context ct x context in
typ_of_expr new_context e
| Symbol s -> lookup context s
| Lam (x, in_typ, body) ->
(let new_context = (x, SymBind in_typ) :: context in
match typ_of_expr new_context body with
| Ok return_typ -> Ok (Arrow (in_typ, return_typ))
| Error e -> Error (str [ "Error finding return type of lambda. Error: "
; e]))
| App (e0,
e1) ->
(match (typ_of_expr context e0,
typ_of_expr context e1) with
| (Ok (Arrow (t0_0, t0_1)),
Ok t1) -> if t1 = t0_0
then Ok t0_1
else Error (str ["Type mismatch"])
| (Ok (ClosureTy (ctx, Arrow (t0_0, t0_1))),
Ok t1) -> if t1 = t0_0
then Ok t0_1
else Error
(str
["Type mismatch. t0_0: "
;string_of_typ t0_0
;", t0_1: "
;string_of_typ t0_1
;", t1: "
;string_of_typ t1
])
| (Ok t, _) -> Error (str ["Not given a lambda as first thing to App. "
;string_of_typ t])
| _ -> Error (str ["Error getting typ of expr App"]))
| TLam (a, body) ->
(let new_context = (a, QuantifierBind) :: context in
match typ_of_expr new_context body with
| Ok body_type -> Ok (ClosureTy (new_context,
Forall (a,
body_type)))
| Error e -> Error (str [ "Failed to get typ of TLam, a nd thus can not construct Forall. Error: "
; e]))
| TApp (TLam (a, body),
t1) -> let new_context = (a, QuantifierBind) :: con text in
typ_of_expr new_context body
| TApp (e0, t1) ->
(match typ_of_expr context e0 with
| Ok (ClosureTy (ctx,
Forall (a, body))) ->
let new_context = (a, SymBind t1) :: ctx @ context i n
Ok (ClosureTy (new_context,
body))
| Ok (ClosureTy(ctx,
t)) ->
Error (str ["TApp given ClosureTy with non-forall on left-hand-side. IS: "
;string_of_typ t])
| Ok (Forall (a, body)) -> Error "TApp given naked Fora ll as first argument"
| Ok _ -> Error "TApp given non-Forall first argument"
| Error e -> Error (str ["Error in TApp - error: "
;e]))
let rec eval context e =
let context: (expr context) = context in
match e with
| Unit -> Ok Unit
| Closure (ctx, e) -> eval (List.append ctx context) e
| Int i -> Ok (Int i)
| Lam (x, t, body) -> Ok (Closure (context,
Lam (x, t, body)))
| Symbol s -> lookup context s
| App (Closure(ctx,
Lam (x, t, body)),
e1) ->
let new_context = (x, SymBind e1) :: ctx @ context in
eval new_context body
| App (e0, e1) ->
(match eval context e0 with
| Ok (Closure (ctx,
Lam (x, t, body))) ->
eval (ctx @ context) (App (Lam (x,
t,
body),
e1))
| Ok _ -> Error "Can't apply non-Lam"
| Error e -> Error (str ["Apply error: "
;e]))
| TLam (a, body) -> Ok (TLam (a, body))
| TApp (TLam (a, body),
given_typ) ->
let new_context = (a, QuantifierBind) :: context in
eval new_context body
| TApp (e0, t) ->
(match eval context e0 with
| Ok (TLam (a, body)) ->
let _ = failwith "Not gonna happen" in
eval context (TApp (TLam (a, body), t))
| Ok (Closure (ctx,
TLam (a,
body))) ->
eval (ctx @ context) body
| Ok _ -> Error "Can't type-apply non-Λ"
| Error e ->
Error (str [ "Error applying type lambda. Error: "
; e]))
(* helper functions *)
let tlam a body = TLam (a, body)
let lam x t body = Lam (x, t, body)
let app e0 e1 = App (e0, e1)
let tapp e0 tyT1 = TApp (e0, tyT1)
(* eval [] (tlam "a" (lam "x"
* (SymbolTy "a")
* (Symbol "x"))) *)
let k_combinator = (tlam "a" (tlam "_b"
(lam
"x"
(SymbolTy "a")
(lam
"_y"
(SymbolTy "_b")
(Symbol "x")))))
let k_intint = (TApp (TApp (k_combinator,
IntTy),
IntTy))
(* DEAR HN READER: This is what is failing me. *)
let applied_k = typ_of_expr [] (app k_intint (Int 1))Just fyi, this is called System F.
I do not remember any OCaml and I get an error when trying to run it (File "./test.ml", line 123, characters 6-7: Error: Syntax error: operator expected.) so I do not know if I can be of much help. What is the result of typ_of_expr [] (app k_intint (Int 1))? I presume that you expect it to be IntTy -> IntTy, right?
It is indeed system F I'm trying to implement :-)
My formatting for HN seems to have screwed the program up. You'll find the contents of systemf.ml in this paste: https://pastebin.com/gw20LBNR
Here is the result from my OCaml repl:
# typ_of_expr [] (app k_intint (Int 1));;
- : (typ, string) result =
Error "Type mismatch. t0_0: SymbolTy a, t0_1: Arrow, t1: IntTy"
You are correct about what `(k_intint (Int 1))` should be. I hope for `k_intint` to be `IntTy -> IntTy -> IntTy`.To put that another way, if `forall a.` introduces types (it's like the big lambda), then you can only have a type with `forall`s on the left on the outside. So:
`forall a. forall b. a + b` is a type but
`forall a. a -> forall b. b -> c` is not a type since that `forall` isn't all the way on the left in a chain like the first one.
If you're not in that fragment, and you're trying to infer types, you're gonna have a bad time unless you've got something exceedingly clever up your sleeve.
So `ForAll` should not be one of the "Type" type constructors. It should be its own type, like
# The int is the number of variables bound, then the type is the type that uses them
data Scheme = Int Type
data Type = 0 | 1 | Var Int | Product Type Type | ... ty(TApp ...) = Closure (Arrow (SymbolTy a) (Arrow (SymbolTy _b) (SymbolTy a)))
ty(Int 1) = IntTy
ty(App (TApp ...) (Int 1)) = Failure
"Type mismatch. t0_0: SymbolTy a, t0_1: Arrow (SymbolTy _b) (SymbolTy a), t1: IntTy".
Here `t0_0` is a formal argument type and `t1` is being applied, so even though they are structurally different it should be inferred that `SymbolTy a` equals to `IntTy` (probably by updating the context). But your code doesn't do that.I strongly recommend to first familize yourself with Hindley-Milner type system (and possibly Algorithm W) which type inference is efficient and easy enough to understand. Even though the decidable type inference in System F is impossible, the basic techniques for (partial) type inference are not too different.
Two things I see missing from your code: A current substitution and a unification function.
This paper might also be helpful to read: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.65....
:)
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/2502...
- tokens are just collections of non-space characters, passed raw through to an assembler, where it is assumed that they denote machine words. Whatever happens, happens. The "symbol" eax will refer to a register, for instance. (If this project had stuck with AT&T assembly syntax, at least that would have been qualified as %eax%).
- functions aren't registered under Lisp symbols but are just global references to assembly-language labels. It seems we can just do (1234 4) and it will just call address 1234.
- no LIS)t P)rocessing to be seen here.
That said, there is no language that is just "Lisp", and so there is no prescribed set of semantics. We can make a prefix expression preprocessor for x86 assembly language and call it "Phil Lisp" (or whatever qualifier).
To be a lisp, you need to be able to declare and call functions, and construct and manipulate lists. Once you have that, you can then manipulate the code itself since s-exprs are just lists of a certain construction.