[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Guile CSE elimination of record accessor?
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: Guile CSE elimination of record accessor? |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:43:38 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Hi :)
On Sat 27 Apr 2024 19:04, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
> In Guile module (ice-9 vlist), one reads:
>
> ;; Asserting that something is a vlist is actually a win if your next
> ;; step is to call record accessors, because that causes CSE to
> ;; eliminate the type checks in those accessors.
> ;;
> (define-inlinable (assert-vlist val)
> (unless (vlist? val)
> (throw 'wrong-type-arg
> #f
> "Not a vlist: ~S"
> (list val)
> (list val))))
>
> [...]
>
> (define (vlist-head vlist)
> "Return the head of VLIST."
> (assert-vlist vlist)
> (let ((base (vlist-base vlist))
> (offset (vlist-offset vlist)))
> (block-ref (block-content base) offset)))
>
>
> Other said, the argument ’vlist’ is “type-checked” with ’assert-vlist’
> and thus that is exploited by Guile compiler, if I understand correctly
> the comment.
>
> The first question is: is it still correct? Because this module had
> been implemented before many Guile compiler improvements.
No, the comment is incorrect. The type check on whatever accessor is
called first (unspecified in scheme; probably we should just bite the
bullet and do predictable left-to-right semantics, as racket does) will
dominate the rest and eliminate those checks. The assert-type is
unnecessary.
To see this, do ,optimize-cps at the repl, and count the number of
e.g. struct? checks with and without the assert-vlist. There is only
one, either way. (A type check is a heap-object? check, then struct?,
then get the vtable, then check against the global variable <vlist>.
All of these duplicates get eliminated.)
> PS: Raining day and weird pastime… diving into Guile source code. ;-)
:)
Cheers
Andy