ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Graphinators and the duality of SIMD and MIMD
Full text PdfPdf (1.10 MB)
Source Conference on LISP and Functional Programming archive
Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming table of contents
Snowbird, Utah, United States
Pages: 224 - 234  
Year of Publication: 1988
ISBN:0-89791-273-X
Authors
Paul Hudak  Yale University, Department of Computer Science, Box 2158 Yale Station, New Haven, CT
Eric Hohr  Yale University, Department of Computer Science, Box 2158 Yale Station, New Haven, CT
Sponsors
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 17,   Citation Count: 5
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/62678.62714
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Combinator reduction is a well-known implementation technique for executing functional programs. In this paper we present a new method for parallel combinator reduction based on viewing combinators simply as “graph mutators.” We show that each combinator in Turner's standard set can be expressed using two primitive operations on a binary graph — one to alter an edge and one to insert a vertex — and four symmetric variants of them. We call these primitive operations graphinators, and present a single 7-step graphinator sequence which implements the reduction rules for all combinators in the set. This sequence allows redexes involving any of the combinators to be reduced in parallel on a SIMD machine. We have implemented a graph reducer on the Connection Machine based on these results, together with a novel execution strategy called prudent evaluation. Preliminary performance results suggest that our implementation does reasonably well, significantly better than previous efforts, but perhaps still not well enough to be practical. Nevertheless, the approach suggests a new way of thinking about program execution, and we have thoughts on how to improve our implementation.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
R. Grondalski. A vlsi chip set for a :massively parallel architecture. In IEEE International Solid- State Circuits Conference, pages 198-199,399-400, IEEE, 1987.
 
2
 
3
 
4
P. Hudak. Distributed Graph Marking. Research Report YALEU/DCS/RR-268, Yale University, January 1983.
 
5
6
 
7
8
9
 
10
T. Johnsson. The G-machine: an abstract machine for graph reduction. Techn!ical Report, PMG, Department of Computer Science, Chalmers University of Tech., February 1985.
11
 
12
B. C. Kuszmaul. Simulating Applicative Architectures on the Connection Machine. Master's thesis, M.I.T., May 1986.
 
13
S. Leinwand and J. Goguen. Architectural options for the rewrite rule machine. In Proceedings Seeond International Conference on Supercomputing, Santa Clara, California, May 1987.
 
14
A. G. Ranade, S. N. Bhatt, and S. L. Johnsson. The Fluent Abstract Machine. Technical Report YALEU/DCS/TR-573, Yale University, Department of Computer Science, January 1988.
15
16
 
17
D.A. Turner. Another algorithm for bracket abstraction. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 44(2):267-270, June 1979.
 
18
D.A. Turner. A new implementation technique for applicative languages. Software -- Practice and Experience, 9'31-49, 1979.