Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Parrot, threads & fears for the future.

by aufflick (Deacon)
on Oct 25, 2006 at 05:53 UTC ( #580493=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Parrot, threads & fears for the future.

People who are interested in this might be interested in this blog entry:

Futures, Continuations, Closures and Oh My!

It looks at optimising a bytecode vm (in this case smalltalk) to automatically parallelise code that makes use of futures. Very neat ideas.

  • Comment on Re: Parrot, threads & fears for the future.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Parrot, threads & fears for the future.
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Oct 25, 2006 at 08:02 UTC

    I was sure I'd read that before somewhere. So I went off on a scavenge hunt of code and PM threads and my reams of random thoughts and jottings trying to remember where and when. That eventually lead me through some of my experiments with Erlang and then back to Re^18: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined?, and indeed that whole (nauseatingly frustrating) thread Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined?.

    The whole motivation behind that thread was an attempt to make the case (that I still firmly believe to be true), that if Perl(6) had a defined execution order, it would greatly increase the potential for fine grained, interpreter induced, parallel execution. Even down to parallelising the clauses within an individual statement or line of code.

    Having tracked down that Erlang reference I posted, and followed a few of the links from it, although I hadn't tracked my way back to your reference, I was all ready (had started typing:), to claim to have seen it back then (circa. April 2004).

    It was only then that I noticed the date! (less than a month ago.)

    So, maybe I saw something which the author also saw that inspired his blog entry, or maybe it was the simply the similarity between its title and Insight needed: Perl, C, Gtk2, Audio, Threads, IPC & Performance - Oh My! that has sat in my Personal Nodelet for several months that triggered the feelings of deja vue. Either way, thanks for the link, it was an interesting read.

    On the subject of continations and the continuation passing style. That is another of my fears regarding Parrot. That blog entry suggests that the costs of CPS is a single stack frame and very low, light and fast.

    However, other stuff I read when trying to get to grips with the meaning of CPS and the implications of its use within Parrot when combined with Parrots

    • register-based architecture (and register spill files);
    • very large instruction (opcode) set;
    • exception mechanism based around stacking continuation snapshots.

    All this combined to give me the impression that Parrot is going generate a huge runtime stack requirement. Albeit that the stack will be implemented as some kind of linked list in the heap. This impression was somewhat confirmed when someone (possibly Dan?) posted a description of what happened when they tried to run a fairly large, computer generated PAR program.

    Unfortunately, I never did understand enough of the Parrot source code, much of which was still temporary and was changing, evolving and being re-written in huge part on a daily and weekly basis back then, for me to properly make the transition from unedrstanding to being able to confirm and formally describe those fears.

    The impression remains, but things have moved on too far for me to hope to catch up now. It was another of those gut feelings that lead to my agreement with tilly elsewhere, that Parrot was unlikely to produce something that would run Perl6 efficiently.

    Maybe in the pre-compiling world of GHC, with its huge depth of code analysis and very advanced compile time optimisations, the costs of using CPS snapshots to implement exception mechanisms mean that large swaths of intermediate snapshots between points in the HLL code that raise exceptions and points in the code that catch those exceptions can be optimised away at compile time so reducing the peek stackframe snapshot costs?

    Maybe, I simply misunderstand the implications of what needs to be stored when you combine exceptions, closures, nested lexical stashes, nested namespaces and CPS?


    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
The future is futures
by BigAl (Scribe) on Oct 31, 2006 at 07:15 UTC
    People who are interested in this might be interested in this blog entry...
    I like the futures model of concurrency. I haven't decided yet if it will make it into Parrot. This blog post is an interesting twist on the idea. Thanks. --Allison

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://580493]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (8)
As of 2021-06-16 17:37 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    What does the "s" stand for in "perls"? (Whence perls)












    Results (76 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?