1. Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 748 views
Here's the moment everyone's been waiting for: I've alted eu.ex to include the following features: s = routine_name( i ) -- returns a routine name given an id s = routine_list() -- all routines registered with routine_id() i = variable_id( s ) -- returns a unique variable id s = variable_name( i ) -- returns a varable name given an id s = variable_list() -- all variables registerd with variable_id() i = variable_type( i ) -- returns a variable's type given an id o = read( i ) -- reads a variable's value write( i, o ) -- writes a variable's value I hope all of you are happy. I'm still looking into routine ids for built-in routines. Like Rob said, its a little difficult to implement. I'm not including source code at this point, just a translated executable and a demo program. I'll be updating these features with the beta and official releases of 2.5, or giving them to RDS. Go here to download: http://www.merkur.000k2.com/euw.zip ~Greg
2. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 662 views
Sorry, scratch variable_type() for now, I've still got to work on that one... On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:51:02 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > Here's the moment everyone's been waiting for: > > I've alted eu.ex to include the following features: > > s = routine_name( i ) -- returns a routine name given an id > s = routine_list() -- all routines registered with routine_id() > i = variable_id( s ) -- returns a unique variable id > s = variable_name( i ) -- returns a varable name given an id > s = variable_list() -- all variables registerd with variable_id() > i = variable_type( i ) -- returns a variable's type given an id > o = read( i ) -- reads a variable's value > write( i, o ) -- writes a variable's value > > I hope all of you are happy. I'm still looking into routine ids for > built-in routines. Like Rob said, its a little difficult to implement. > I'm not including source code at this point, just a translated > executable and a demo program. I'll be updating these features with > the beta and official releases of 2.5, or giving them to RDS. > > Go here to download: > http://www.merkur.000k2.com/euw.zip > > > ~Greg >
3. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 652 views
Geeze, once you start altering that interpreter, its really easy to keep adding stuff. I altered '=' to return true/false for sequences, but only in an 'if' statement. Example:
? "this" = "that" -- prints {1, 1, 0, 0} if "this" = "that" then -- prints 0 or 1 ? 1 else ? 0 end if
~Greg same site: http://www.merkur.000k2.com/euw.zip On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:55:21 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Sorry, scratch variable_type() for now, I've still got to work on that one... > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:51:02 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Here's the moment everyone's been waiting for: > > > > I've alted eu.ex to include the following features: > > > > s = routine_name( i ) -- returns a routine name given an id > > s = routine_list() -- all routines registered with routine_id() > > i = variable_id( s ) -- returns a unique variable id > > s = variable_name( i ) -- returns a varable name given an id > > s = variable_list() -- all variables registerd with variable_id() > > i = variable_type( i ) -- returns a variable's type given an id > > o = read( i ) -- reads a variable's value > > write( i, o ) -- writes a variable's value > > > > I hope all of you are happy. I'm still looking into routine ids for > > built-in routines. Like Rob said, its a little difficult to implement. > > I'm not including source code at this point, just a translated > > executable and a demo program. I'll be updating these features with > > the beta and official releases of 2.5, or giving them to RDS. > > > > Go here to download: > > http://www.merkur.000k2.com/euw.zip > > > > > > ~Greg > > >
4. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 663 views
On 25 Nov 2004, at 1:51, Greg Haberek wrote: > > Here's the moment everyone's been waiting for: > > I've alted eu.ex to include the following features: > > s = routine_name( i ) -- returns a routine name given an id > s = routine_list() -- all routines registered with routine_id() > i = variable_id( s ) -- returns a unique variable id > s = variable_name( i ) -- returns a varable name given an id > s = variable_list() -- all variables registerd with variable_id() i > = > variable_type( i ) -- returns a variable's type given an id o = read( i > ) > -- reads a variable's value write( i, o ) -- writes > a > variable's value > > > I hope all of you are happy. I'm still looking into routine ids for > built-in routines. Like Rob said, its a little difficult to implement. > I'm not including source code at this point, just a translated > executable and a demo program. I'll be updating these features with > the beta and official releases of 2.5, or giving them to RDS. > > Go here to download: > http://www.merkur.000k2.com/euw.zip That's nice, but we can't have them as an exe that runs at Eu's speed, and we can't have the source unless we bought what? How much slower is your interpreter now? Kat
5. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 715 views
> That's nice, but we can't have them as an exe that runs at Eu's speed, and > we can't have the source unless we bought what? How much slower is your > interpreter now? I'll put out the source once I get all the features in that I'd like. As far as speed, well, it definitly needs to be run with the C backend. sorting test - 10,000 random integers 0 - 999 exw.exe - 0.020 seconds euw.exe - 11.376 seconds That's 568% slower! It's my hope that since I've implemented these features, RDS may be more likely to use them, since I put in all the grunt work of thinking and all. Heck, the whole equals thing for sequences was a matter of changing one line. One line!!! Check this out: execute.e: line 1139 in procedure opEQUALS_IFW() if val[a] = val[b] then change to: if equal( val[a], val[b] ) then That's it!!! I had to rack my brain figuring out the inner workings of the interpreter to put in the rest, but now its easy as pie. Rob's coding style isn't that bad once you get the hang of it. ~Greg
6. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 675 views
Greg Haberek wrote: > > > That's nice, but we can't have them as an exe that runs at Eu's speed, and > > we can't have the source unless we bought what? How much slower is your > > interpreter now? > > I'll put out the source once I get all the features in that I'd like. > As far as speed, well, it definitly needs to be run with the C > backend. > > sorting test - 10,000 random integers 0 - 999 > > exw.exe - 0.020 seconds > euw.exe - 11.376 seconds > > That's 568% slower! > > It's my hope that since I've implemented these features, RDS may be > more likely to use them, since I put in all the grunt work of thinking > and all. Heck, the whole equals thing for sequences was a matter of > changing one line. One line!!! Check this out: > > execute.e: line 1139 in procedure opEQUALS_IFW() > if val[a] = val[b] then > > change to: > if equal( val[a], val[b] ) then > > That's it!!! I had to rack my brain figuring out the inner workings of > the interpreter to put in the rest, but now its easy as pie. Rob's > coding style isn't that bad once you get the hang of it. > Someone needs to separate the PD front-end from the back-end so that the front-end can just spit out an unshrouded .il byte-code file, and then the PD back-end can read in this file and run it. I will get to this eventually if no one else does first. Then we just have to create a new back-end that runs faster than the PD back-end, or hope Rob "sees the light" and simply sells us the real back-end (for a profit!). I think I will try writing a new backend in Ocaml, which shouldn't be too hard for the core of the language because Ocaml already does everything Euphoria does (in a syntactically different way) and has garbage collection etc. (It also has some support for threads and other stuff people have been looking for if you want to jump ship completely.) It can run interpreted, or as bytecode, or as native code, just a Eu can. When compiled, it is much faster than translated Eu (it approaches the speed of C for pure Ocaml, of course it wouldn't run as fast as an Eu .il interpreter), so it might be possible to make a halfway decent performing backend. I'll probably just make a mini-backend implementing the core at first to see how it performs...
7. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by spent memory <spent.memory at gmail.com> Nov 25, 2004
- 669 views
greg just thought id let u know your posts come up in my spam folder for some weird reason, i get the euforum posted to my gmail account On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 05:15:13 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > > > That's nice, but we can't have them as an exe that runs at Eu's speed, and > > we can't have the source unless we bought what? How much slower is your > > interpreter now? > > I'll put out the source once I get all the features in that I'd like. > As far as speed, well, it definitly needs to be run with the C > backend. > > sorting test - 10,000 random integers 0 - 999 > > exw.exe - 0.020 seconds > euw.exe - 11.376 seconds > > That's 568% slower! > > It's my hope that since I've implemented these features, RDS may be > more likely to use them, since I put in all the grunt work of thinking > and all. Heck, the whole equals thing for sequences was a matter of > changing one line. One line!!! Check this out: > > execute.e: line 1139 in procedure opEQUALS_IFW() > if val[a] = val[b] then > > change to: > if equal( val[a], val[b] ) then > > That's it!!! I had to rack my brain figuring out the inner workings of > the interpreter to put in the rest, but now its easy as pie. Rob's > coding style isn't that bad once you get the hang of it. > > ~Greg > >
8. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 652 views
Greg Haberek wrote: > I'll put out the source once I get all the features in that I'd like. > As far as speed, well, it definitly needs to be run with the C > backend. > > sorting test - 10,000 random integers 0 - 999 > > exw.exe - 0.020 seconds > euw.exe - 11.376 seconds > > That's 568% slower! Try my new version of opASSIGN_SUBS...
procedure opASSIGN_SUBS() -- also ASSIGN_SUBS_CHECK, ASSIGN_SUBS_I -- LHS single subscript and assignment object x, subs a = Code[pc+1] -- the sequence b = Code[pc+2] -- the subscript if sequence(val[b]) then RTFatal("subscript must be an atom\n(assigning to subscript of a sequenc end if c = Code[pc+3] -- the RHS value x = val[a] lhs_check_subs(x, val[b]) x = val[c] subs = val[b] val[a][subs] = x -- single LHS subscript pc += 4 end procedure
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. Regards, Rob Craig Rapid Deployment Software http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
9. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 666 views
[sounds like Peter from Family Guy] "Holy friggin crap!!" That's amazing. Here's a speed update: sorting 10,000 random objects between 0 and 999 Old stats: exw: 0.020 seconds euw: 10.975 seconds (best run, some were 11+) New stats: exw: 0.020 seconds euw: 0.281 seconds I guess the interpreted interpreter isn't so slow after all! ~Greg P.S. I just added version() and now I'm working on a 'next' statement. I think, due to the internal working of for and while loops, I'll have to make 'next for' and 'next while' statements... or I need some way of determining what type of loop i'm in. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:09:32 -0800, Robert Craig <guest at rapideuphoria.com> wrote: > > posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> > > > Greg Haberek wrote: > > I'll put out the source once I get all the features in that I'd like. > > As far as speed, well, it definitly needs to be run with the C > > backend. > > > > sorting test - 10,000 random integers 0 - 999 > > > > exw.exe - 0.020 seconds > > euw.exe - 11.376 seconds > > > > That's 568% slower! > > Try my new version of opASSIGN_SUBS... > > }}} <eucode> > procedure opASSIGN_SUBS() -- also ASSIGN_SUBS_CHECK, ASSIGN_SUBS_I > -- LHS single subscript and assignment > object x, subs > > a = Code[pc+1] -- the sequence > b = Code[pc+2] -- the subscript > if sequence(val[b]) then > RTFatal("subscript must be an atom\n(assigning to subscript of a > sequenc > end if > c = Code[pc+3] -- the RHS value > x = val[a] > lhs_check_subs(x, val[b]) > x = val[c] > subs = val[b] > val[a][subs] = x -- single LHS subscript > pc += 4 > end procedure > </eucode> {{{ > > I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. > > Regards, > Rob Craig > Rapid Deployment Software > http://www.RapidEuphoria.com > > > > >
10. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Patrick Barnes <mrtrick at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 668 views
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:21:25 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > P.S. I just added version() and now I'm working on a 'next' statement. > I think, due to the internal working of for and while loops, I'll have > to make 'next for' and 'next while' statements... or I need some way > of determining what type of loop i'm in. Well, what about if you are next'ing a for loop, you specify the variable of the loop you mean? I was thinking about this before, and it doesn't work too well for while loops, because there is no loop variable... That way, if there's no var, it's for a while loop, if there's a var, it's for a for loop? for a = 1 to 10 do for b = 1 to 200 do for c = 1 to 3 do if something(a,b,c) then next c --skips to the next iteration in the 'c' loop end if dostuff(b,a*c) if something_else(a,b,c) then next a --skips to the next iteration in the 'a' loop end if end for end for end for Looks pretty intuitive to me! -- MrTrick
11. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 727 views
> Looks pretty intuitive to me! Um... kinda. In my opinion, the next statement should act like an exit statement, only instead of leaving the loop, it jumps back to the top and increments the counter when needed (for vs while). The problem is, I don't know if I'm in a for or a while loop. I wish I could explain it better, you'd understand if you've studied the source code as much as I have in the past few days... What you're offering would be nice to have, but it looks like it could get a bit messy (internally, that is). ~Greg
12. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Patrick Barnes <mrtrick at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 653 views
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:09:37 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Looks pretty intuitive to me! > > Um... kinda. In my opinion, the next statement should act like an exit > statement, only instead of leaving the loop, it jumps back to the top > and increments the counter when needed (for vs while). Well, that's what I meant. What did you think I meant? >The problem is, > I don't know if I'm in a for or a while loop. I wish I could explain > it better, you'd understand if you've studied the source code as much > as I have in the past few days... That's ok, my brain is twisted enough around the interprocess Windows API right now. >What you're offering would be nice to have, but it looks like it could get a bit messy (internally, that is). Well, lets see how it goes then! -- MrTrick
13. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Nov 26, 2004
- 630 views
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:09:37 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Looks pretty intuitive to me! > >Um... kinda. In my opinion, the next statement should act like an exit >statement, only instead of leaving the loop, it jumps back to the top >and increments the counter when needed (for vs while). The problem is, >I don't know if I'm in a for or a while loop. I wish I could explain >it better, you'd understand if you've studied the source code as much >as I have in the past few days... What you're offering would be nice >to have, but it looks like it could get a bit messy (internally, that >is). > I was about to say that next a -- for loop might get confused with next -- while loop a = ... I don't know if this will help or not but you may have slightly more luck with next(a) since no valid euphoria statement begins with ( Pete
14. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 665 views
I think I've got it figured out (I think...) To stick with current keyword conventions, this is how next will operate: -- example 1: for i = 1 to 5 do if i = 4 then next -- should skip 4 end if end for -- example 2: while 1 do if some_condition then next -- skip the rest of the code end if -- do something else end while This way next operates just like exit, except it goes to the top of the loop, not the bottom. Give me a few days to get it worked out, there's still a few parts of the interpreter I don't understand, which is preventing me from getting everything working. ~Greg On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:54:40 +0000, Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:09:37 -0500, Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > >> Looks pretty intuitive to me! > > > >Um... kinda. In my opinion, the next statement should act like an exit > >statement, only instead of leaving the loop, it jumps back to the top > >and increments the counter when needed (for vs while). The problem is, > >I don't know if I'm in a for or a while loop. I wish I could explain > >it better, you'd understand if you've studied the source code as much > >as I have in the past few days... What you're offering would be nice > >to have, but it looks like it could get a bit messy (internally, that > >is). > > > I was about to say that > next a -- for loop > might get confused with > next -- while loop > a = ... > > I don't know if this will help or not but you may have slightly more > luck with next(a) since no valid euphoria statement begins with ( > > Pete > > > > >
15. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 663 views
Greg Haberek wrote: > > [sounds like Peter from Family Guy] "Holy friggin crap!!" > > That's amazing. Here's a speed update: > > sorting 10,000 random objects between 0 and 999 > > Old stats: > exw: 0.020 seconds > euw: 10.975 seconds (best run, some were 11+) > > New stats: > exw: 0.020 seconds > euw: 0.281 seconds > > I guess the interpreted interpreter isn't so slow after all! > Damn. Explanation? Sounds like a trick I ought to know. I have often put in such "optimizations" and taken them back out because it actually made things slower. And if you mess around with this much it goes back to being 10x slower. What's the secret?
16. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 660 views
Andy Serpa wrote: > > Greg Haberek wrote: > > > > [sounds like Peter from Family Guy] "Holy friggin crap!!" > > > > That's amazing. Here's a speed update: > > > > sorting 10,000 random objects between 0 and 999 > > > > Old stats: > > exw: 0.020 seconds > > euw: 10.975 seconds (best run, some were 11+) > > > > New stats: > > exw: 0.020 seconds > > euw: 0.281 seconds > > > > I guess the interpreted interpreter isn't so slow after all! > > > > Damn. > > Explanation? Sounds like a trick I ought to know. I have often put in such > "optimizations" > and taken them back out because it actually made things slower. And if you > mess around > with this much it goes back to being 10x slower. What's the secret? There's a very subtle, but in this case major, performance issue here. I only found it by using profile_time. (It has nothing to do with 2.5. Any version of Euphoria would act the same.) The new, fast version of the code is below. I've added some comments with !!!, to show how I speeded it up:
procedure opASSIGN_SUBS() -- also ASSIGN_SUBS_CHECK, ASSIGN_SUBS_I -- LHS single subscript and assignment object x, subs a = Code[pc+1] -- the sequence b = Code[pc+2] -- the subscript if sequence(val[b]) then RTFatal("subscript must be an atom\n(assigning to subscript of a sequence)") end if c = Code[pc+3] -- the RHS value x = val[a] -- !!! save val[a] in x, i.e. increments reference count on val[a] lhs_check_subs(x, val[b]) -- !!! pass x instead of val[a] x = val[c] -- !!! x overwritten, removes a reference count on val[a] subs = val[b] val[a][subs] = x -- val[a] now has one reference count, not two pc += 4 end procedure
In the original code I was passing val[a] as an argument, i.e. lhs_check_subs(val[a], val[b]) What it was actually doing internally is something like: temp1 = val[a] temp2 = val[b] lhs_check_subs(temp1, temp2) later on when the statement val[a][subs] = x was performed, there were always *two* reference counts on val[a]. One from val itself, and a dangling reference from temp1, since temp1 was still pointing to val[a]. This means that a full copy of val[a] had to be made in order to safely change an element of it. i.e. without making a copy, we'd be disturbing the value of temp1. val[a] is a 10000-element sequence. Ouch! Euphoria tries to re-use temps as soon as possible, and free their references, but until a temp is overwritten with a new value, any reference count caused by that temp remains. In this case temp1 was not used again. Almost any kind of expression would have resulted in temp1 being overwritten with a new value, with the problematic reference count being removed. I haven't seen a case as bad as this before, but I've long considered doing an optimization where temps and vars whose current value is not going to be used again could be "erased" immediately, thus dropping the reference count on what they are pointing to. To avoid problems, I'd set them to NOVALUE (or something), but if it was a var, you might sometimes see NOVALUE (or something) in ex.err or on the trace screen which could be very confusing, since they should really have a value. Regards, Rob Craig Rapid Deployment Software http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
17. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 662 views
Robert Craig wrote: > > > What it was actually doing internally is something like: > > temp1 = val[a] > temp2 = val[b] > lhs_check_subs(temp1, temp2) > So I can understand, it uses these temps because the val is subscripted? And when you replace it with x it just uses x? Or does it then create a temp with a reference to x for the lhs_check_subs() call?
18. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 660 views
Andy Serpa wrote: > > Robert Craig wrote: > > > > What it was actually doing internally is something like: > > > > temp1 = val[a] > > temp2 = val[b] > > lhs_check_subs(temp1, temp2) > > > > So I can understand, it uses these temps because the val is subscripted? Yes. > And when > you replace it with x it just uses x? Yes. > Or does it then create a temp with a reference > to x for the lhs_check_subs() call? No temp will be used, but an extra ref will be put on the value of x during the call (in case the routine wants to modify the value via it's parameter that receives the value of x). It will be removed at the end of the call. At the end of each routine call, all temps used by that routine are "de-ref'd". The key thing here, is that I am able to explicitly overwrite the value of x, and lose the ref that x has to val[a]. When temp1 had a ref to val[a], I couldn't explicitly kill that ref. I just had to hope that temp1 would be overwritten by some expression before I did the LHS subscripting operation. I wouldn't expect the average Euphoria user to be concerned about internal reference counts. Usually Euphoria does a reasonable job of handling these things. This case is unusual. For instance, it wouldn't happen with a single level of subscripting, because then temp1 would not be required - val would be passed directly. Temps are typically needed to hold expression results (val[a]), not copies of whole variables (val). Regards, Rob Craig Rapid Deployment Software http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
19. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 699 views
- Last edited Nov 27, 2004
> Makes goto look easy, eh? I hate to cave in, but yes. Simply inserting this, amongst a few others, *could* cause goto to work. However, It would kinda screw with the logic flow of the interprerter, which is why I believe Rob has avoided it for so long. It's just plain messy, and that's now what he wants for the language.
-- GTH procedure opGOTO() -- set next instruction to our 'jump' label integer jump jump = Code[pc+1] pc = jump -- usually this is pc+2 for the next inline instruction end procedure
20. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 674 views
- Last edited Nov 27, 2004
> avoided it for so long. It's just plain messy, and that's now what he > wants for the language. sorry, i meant "..not what he wants..."
21. Re: Well I did it! (variable_id, etc..)
- Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com> Nov 26, 2004
- 647 views
- Last edited Nov 27, 2004
On 26 Nov 2004, at 15:32, Greg Haberek wrote: > > > Makes goto look easy, eh? > > I hate to cave in, but yes. Simply inserting this, amongst a few > others, *could* cause goto to work. However, It would kinda screw with > the logic flow of the interprerter, which is why I believe Rob has > avoided it for so long. It's just plain messy, and that's now what he > wants for the language. > > > }}} <eucode> > -- GTH > procedure opGOTO() > -- set next instruction to our 'jump' label > integer jump > jump = Code[pc+1] > pc = jump -- usually this is pc+2 for the next inline instruction > end procedure > </eucode> {{{ I wish i had more than 3 weeks to use it. Kat http://TiggrBox.Info