Unify and conquer

ABSTRACT

Type inference is the process by which an expression in an untyped computer language such as the lambda-calculus, Lisp, or a functional language can be assigned a static data type in order to improve the code generated by a compiler. Storage use inference is the process by which a program in a computer language can be statically analyzed to model its run-time behavior, particularly the containment and sharing relations among its run-time data structures. The information generated by storage use information can also be used to improve the code generated by a compiler, because knowledge of the containment and sharing relations of run-time data structures allows for methods of storage allocation and deallocation which are cheaper than garbage-collected heap storage and allows for the in-place updating of functional aggregates. Type inference and storage use inference have traditionally been considered orthogonal processes, with separate traditions and literature. However, we show in this paper than this separation may be a mistake, because the best-known and best-understood of the type inferencing algorithms—Milner's unification method for ML—already generates valuable sharing and containment information which is then unfortunately discarded. We show that this sharing information is already generated by standard unification algorithms with no additional overhead during unification; however, there is some additional work necessary to extract this information. We have not yet precisely characterized the resolving power of this sharing and containment information, but we believe that it is similar to that generated by researchers using other techniques. However, our scheme seems to only work for functional languages like pure Lisp. The unification of type and storage inferencing yields new insights into the meaning of “aggregate type”, which should prove valuable in the design of future type systems.

REFERENCES

• 1: Ada. Reference Manual for the Ada r Programming Language. American National Standards Institute, New York, 1983.
• 2: Alfred V. Aho , Ravi Sethi , Jeffrey D. Ullman, Compilers: principles, techniques, and tools, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1986
• 3: A. W. Appel , J. R. Ellis , K. Li, Real-time concurrent collection on stock multiprocessors, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1988 conference on Programming Language design and Implementation, p.11-20, June 20-24, 1988, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
• 4: S. Basse, Computer algorithms: introduction to design and analysis, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1987
• 5: Henry G. Baker, Jr., List processing in real time on a serial computer, Communications of the ACM, v.21 n.4, p.280-294, April 1978 [doi>10.1145/359460.359470]
• 6: Baker, H.G. "The Nimble Type Inferencer for Common Lisp-84". Nimble Computer Corl~ration, 1990, in preparation.
• 7: Jeffrey M. Barth, Shifting garbage collection overhead to compile time, Communications of the ACM, v.20 n.7, p.513-518, July 1977 [doi>10.1145/359636.359713]
• 8: Adrienne Bloss, Update analysis and the efficient implementation of functional aggregates, Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Functional programming languages and computer architecture, p.26-38, September 11-13, 1989, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom [doi>10.1145/99370.99373]
• 9: Hans-Juergen Boehm , Alan Demers, Implementing RUSSELL, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.21 n.7, p.186-195, July 1986
• 10: David Read Chase , Kenneth W. Kennedy, Garbage collection and other optimizations, 1988
• 11: Goto, Eiichi. "Monocopy and Associative Algorithms in an Extended Lisp". Info. Sci. Lab., Univ. of Tokyo, 1974.
• 12: Hederman, Lucy. Compile Time Garbage Collection. M.S. Thesis, Rice Univ. Comp. Sci. Dept., Sept. 1988.
• 13: S. Horwitz , P. Pfeiffer , T. Reps, Dependence analysis for pointer variables, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.24 n.7, p.28-40, July 1989
• 14: Paul Hudak , Adrienne Bloss, The aggregate update problem in functional programming systems, Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.300-314, January 14-16, 1985, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/318593.318660]
• 15: Paul Hudak, A semantic model of reference counting and its abstraction (detailed summary), Proceedings of the 1986 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming, p.351-363, August 1986, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/319838.319876]
• 16: Jean D. Ichbiah , Bernd Krieg-Brueckner , Brian A. Wichmann , John G. P. Barnes , Olivier Roubine , Jean-Claude Heliard, Rationale for the design of the Ada programming language, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.14 n.6b, p.1-261, June 1979 [doi>10.1145/956653.956654]
• 17: Katsuro Inoue , Hiroyuki Seki , Hikaru Yagi, Analysis of functional programs to detect run-time garbage cells, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.10 n.4, p.555-578, Oct. 1988 [doi>10.1145/48022.48025]
• 18: Neil D. Jones , Steven S. Muchnick, Flow analysis and optimization of LISP-like structures, Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.244-256, January 29-31, 1979, San Antonio, Texas [doi>10.1145/567752.567776]
• 19: Neil D. Jones , Steven S. Muchnick, A flexible approach to interprocedural data flow analysis and programs with recursive data structures, Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.66-74, January 25-27, 1982, Albuquerque, Mexico [doi>10.1145/582153.582161]
• 20: Simon B. Jones , Daniel Le Métayer, Compile-time garbage collection by sharing analysis, Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Functional programming languages and computer architecture, p.54-74, September 11-13, 1989, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom [doi>10.1145/99370.99375]
• 21: P. C. Kanellakis , J. C. Mitchell, Polymorphic unification and ML typing, Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.105-115, January 11-13, 1989, Austin, Texas, United States [doi>10.1145/75277.75286]
• 22: James Richard Larus , Paul Hifinger, Restructuring symbolic programs for concurrent execution on multiprocessors, 1989
• 23: Henry Lieberman , Carl Hewitt, A real-time garbage collector based on the lifetimes of objects, Communications of the ACM, v.26 n.6, p.419-429, June 1983 [doi>10.1145/358141.358147]
• 24: Harry G. Mairson, Deciding ML typability is complete for deterministic exponential time, Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.382-401, December 1989, San Francisco, California, United States [doi>10.1145/96709.96748]
• 25: Ian A. Mason, The semantics of destructive LISP, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA, 1987
• 26: Milner, R. "A theory of type polymorphism in programming". JCSS 17,3 (1978),348-375.
• 27: John C. Mitchell, Coercion and type inference, Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.175-185, January 15-18, 1984, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States [doi>10.1145/800017.800529]
• 28: David A. Moon, Garbage collection in a large LISP system, Proceedings of the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and functional programming, p.235-246, August 06-08, 1984, Austin, Texas, United States [doi>10.1145/800055.802040]
• 29: Neil D. Jones , Steven S. Muchnick, Binding time optimization in programming languages: Some thoughts toward the design of an ideal language, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles on programming languages, p.77-94, January 19-21, 1976, Atlanta, Georgia [doi>10.1145/800168.811542]
• 30: Muchnik, S., and Jones, N. "Flow analysis and optimization of LISP-like structures". In Program Flow Analysis: Theory and Applications, by the same authors, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.
• 31: Peyton-Jones, S.L. The Implementation of Functional Programming Languages. Prentice-Hall, NY, 1987.
• 32: Uwe Frederik Pleban, Preexecution analysis based on denotational semantics, 1981
• 33: Cristina Ruggieri , Thomas Murtagh, Dynamic memory allocation techniques based on the lifetime of objects, 1987
• 34: C. Ruggieri , T. P. Murtagh, Lifetime analysis of dynamically allocated objects, Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.285-293, January 10-13, 1988, San Diego, California, United States [doi>10.1145/73560.73585]
• 35: Schwartz, J.T. "Optimization of very high level languages, Part II: Deducing relationships of inclusion and membership". Computer Languages 1,3 (1975),197-218.
• 36: Guy L. Steele, Jr., Rabbit: A Compiler for Scheme, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1978
• 37: Norihisa Suzuki, Inferring types in Smalltalk, Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.187-199, January 26-28, 1981, Williamsburg, Virginia [doi>10.1145/567532.567553]
• 38: David Ungar, Generation Scavenging: A non-disruptive high performance storage reclamation algorithm, Proceedings of the first ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN software engineering symposium on Practical software development environments, p.157-167, April 1984
• 39: Mitchell Wand, A semantic prototyping system, Proceedings of the 1984 SIGPLAN symposium on Compiler construction, p.213-221, June 17-22, 1984, Montreal, Canada
• 40: Mitchell Wand , Patrick O'Keefe, On the complexity of type inference with coercion, Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Functional programming languages and computer architecture, p.293-298, September 11-13, 1989, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom [doi>10.1145/99370.99394]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  F. Theory of Computation
  F.3 LOGICS AND MEANINGS OF PROGRAMS
      F.3.3 Studies of Program Constructs
          Subjects: Type structure

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.3 Language Constructs and Features
          Subjects: Data types and structures
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS
      D.4.2 Storage Management
          Subjects: Allocation/deallocation strategies

General Terms:
Languages, Performance