Re: Keyword args

[Andy Wingo]

On Mon 13 Dec 2010 03:10, Daniel Colascione <address@hidden> writes:

> Clearly, the solution is more uniform keyword argument parsing; either
> library functions in C could be provided, or make-network-process could
> be made a Lisp keyword-parsing front-end for some horrible
> %make-network-process that implements the functionality.

FWIW, Guile supports keyword arguments natively. IMO the proper way to
do things is to keep a uniform calling convention, and allow procedures
to parse arguments themselves, with low-level support.

    scheme@(guile-user)> (lambda* (#:key (foo 42)) foo)
    $1 = #<procedure 1c2f080 at standard input:1:0 (#:key foo)>
    scheme@(guile-user)> ,disassemble $1
    Disassembly of #<procedure 1c2f080 at standard input:1:0 (#:key foo)>:

Here we have some instructions that aren't disassembled quite as
perspicaciously as one might like, but they take the args on the stack,
and shuffle the non-positional args up:

       0    (assert-nargs-ge 0 0)           
       3    (bind-optionals/shuffle 0 0 0 0 0 1)

And here we bind keywords. This says "fetch the keywords from the
constant table at index 1, and scan the non-positional args for one
keyword, disallowing other keywords.

      10    (bind-kwargs 0 1 0 1 0)         

It's somewhat complicated code, but it's a const only borne by keyword
arguments. Here we have the code that initializes `foo' if it's not
given:

      16    (reserve-locals 0 1)            
      19    (local-bound? 0)                
      21    (br-if :L111)                   ;; -> 29
      25    (make-int8 42)                  ;; 42
      27    (local-set 0)                   ;; `foo'

And finally (!) the main body:

      29    (local-ref 0)                   ;; `foo'
      31    (return)                        

Some tests:

    > (define (fib n) (if (< n 2) 1 (+ (fib (- n 1)) (fib (- n 2)))))
    > ,time (fib 35)
    $1 = 14930352
    clock utime stime cutime cstime gctime
     2.99  2.99  0.01   0.00   0.00   0.00
    > (define* (fibk #:key (n 0)) (if (< n 2) 1 (+ (fibk #:n (- n 1)) (fibk #:n 
(- n 2)))))
    > ,time (fibk 35)
    <stdin>:5:6: warning: possibly wrong number of arguments to `fibk'
    While executing meta-command:
    ERROR: Odd length of keyword argument list
    > ,time (fibk #:n 35)
    $2 = 14930352
    clock utime stime cutime cstime gctime
     5.01  4.99  0.00   0.00   0.00   0.00

FWIW on this machine a byte-compiled elisp (fib 35) on emacs takes about
6 seconds.

I wrote more about this sort of thing here:

    http://wingolog.org/archives/2009/11/07/case-lambda-in-guile
    http://wingolog.org/archives/2009/11/08/optionals-keywords-oh-my

Our elisp support uses this native infrastructure for keywords and
optionals, but there obviously are some differences regarding
implementation of dynamic scope.  Lexical binding is a lot cheaper, for
Guile, but we hope to get dynamic binding cheap too.

Anyway, I would like to discourage complicated implementations in
"user-space" for keyword arguments. They should be a core language
feature, for all the reasons I gave in my first article.

Happy hacking,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/