mirror of
https://github.com/dhil/phd-dissertation
synced 2026-03-13 02:58:26 +00:00
Notes on escape
This commit is contained in:
27
thesis.bib
27
thesis.bib
@@ -1884,4 +1884,29 @@
|
|||||||
title = {MLton Documentation},
|
title = {MLton Documentation},
|
||||||
year = 2014,
|
year = 2014,
|
||||||
month = jan
|
month = jan
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# Comparison of control operators via double barrelled CPS
|
||||||
|
@article{Thielecke02,
|
||||||
|
author = {Hayo Thielecke},
|
||||||
|
title = {Comparing Control Constructs by Double-Barrelled {CPS}},
|
||||||
|
journal = {High. Order Symb. Comput.},
|
||||||
|
volume = {15},
|
||||||
|
number = {2-3},
|
||||||
|
pages = {141--160},
|
||||||
|
year = {2002}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# Comparison of effect handlers and shift/reset in a polymorphic type system
|
||||||
|
@inproceedings{PirogPS19,
|
||||||
|
author = {Maciej Pir{\'{o}}g and
|
||||||
|
Piotr Polesiuk and
|
||||||
|
Filip Sieczkowski},
|
||||||
|
title = {Typed Equivalence of Effect Handlers and Delimited Control},
|
||||||
|
booktitle = {{FSCD}},
|
||||||
|
series = {LIPIcs},
|
||||||
|
volume = {131},
|
||||||
|
pages = {30:1--30:16},
|
||||||
|
publisher = {Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"{u}}r Informatik},
|
||||||
|
year = {2019}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|||||||
79
thesis.tex
79
thesis.tex
@@ -542,6 +542,26 @@ wide range of control operators from the literature.
|
|||||||
% callcc is a procedural variation of catch. It was invented in
|
% callcc is a procedural variation of catch. It was invented in
|
||||||
% 1982~\cite{AbelsonHAKBOBPCRFRHSHW85}.
|
% 1982~\cite{AbelsonHAKBOBPCRFRHSHW85}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A full formal comparison of the control operators is out of scope of
|
||||||
|
this chapter. The literature contains comparisons of various control
|
||||||
|
operators along various dimensions, e.g.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
\citet{Thielecke02} studies a handful of operators via double
|
||||||
|
barrelled continuation passing style. \citet{ForsterKLP19} compare the
|
||||||
|
relative expressiveness of untyped and simply-typed variations of
|
||||||
|
effect handlers, shift/reset, and monadic reflection by means of
|
||||||
|
whether they are macro-expressible. Their work demonstrates that in an
|
||||||
|
untyped setting each operator is macro-expressible, but in most cases
|
||||||
|
the macro-translations do not preserve typeability, for instance the
|
||||||
|
simple type structure is insufficient to type the image of
|
||||||
|
macro-translation between effect handlers and shift/reset.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
However, \citet{PirogPS19} show that with a polymorphic type system
|
||||||
|
the translation preserve typeability.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
\citet{Shan04} shows that dynamic delimited control and static
|
||||||
|
delimited control is macro-expressible in an untyped setting.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\section{Notions of continuations}
|
\section{Notions of continuations}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% \citeauthor{Reynolds93} has written a historical account of the
|
% \citeauthor{Reynolds93} has written a historical account of the
|
||||||
@@ -712,6 +732,46 @@ and callcc turned out to be essentially the same operator.
|
|||||||
statement-oriented control mechanisms such as jumps and labels
|
statement-oriented control mechanisms such as jumps and labels
|
||||||
programmable in an expression-oriented language.
|
programmable in an expression-oriented language.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
|
The operator introduces a new computation form.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
\[
|
||||||
|
M, N \in \CompCat ::= \cdots \mid \Escape\;k\;\In\;M
|
||||||
|
\]
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
The variable $k$ is called the \emph{escape variable} and it is bound
|
||||||
|
in $M$. The escape variable exposes the current continuation of the
|
||||||
|
$\Escape$-expression to the programmer. The captured continuation is
|
||||||
|
abortive, thus an invocation of the escape variable in the body $M$
|
||||||
|
has the effect of performing a non-local exit.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
In terms of jumps and labels the $\Escape$-expression can be
|
||||||
|
understood as corresponding to a kind of label and an application of
|
||||||
|
the escape variable $k$ can be understood as corresponding to a jump
|
||||||
|
to the label.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\citeauthor{Reynolds98a}' original treatise of escape was untyped, and
|
||||||
|
as such, the escape variable could escape its captor, e.g.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
\[
|
||||||
|
\Let\;k \revto (\Escape\;k\;\In\;k)\;\In\; N
|
||||||
|
\]
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
Here the current continuation, $N$, gets bound to $k$ in the
|
||||||
|
$\Escape$-expression, which returns $k$ as-is, and thus becomes
|
||||||
|
available for use within $N$. \citeauthor{Reynolds98a} recognised the
|
||||||
|
power of this idiom and noted that it could be used to implement
|
||||||
|
coroutines and backtracking~\cite{Reynolds98a}.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
In our simply-typed setting it is not possible for the continuation to
|
||||||
|
propagate outside its binding $\Escape$-expression as it would require
|
||||||
|
the addition of either recursive types or some other escape hatch like
|
||||||
|
mutable reference cells.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The typing of $\Escape$ and $\Continue$ reflects that the captured
|
||||||
|
continuation is abortive.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
\begin{mathpar}
|
\begin{mathpar}
|
||||||
\inferrule*
|
\inferrule*
|
||||||
{\typ{\Gamma,k : \Cont\,\Record{A;\Zero}}{M : A}}
|
{\typ{\Gamma,k : \Cont\,\Record{A;\Zero}}{M : A}}
|
||||||
@@ -722,11 +782,23 @@ programmable in an expression-oriented language.
|
|||||||
{\typ{\Gamma}{\Continue~W~V : \Zero}}
|
{\typ{\Gamma}{\Continue~W~V : \Zero}}
|
||||||
\end{mathpar}
|
\end{mathpar}
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
|
The return type of the continuation object can be taken as a telltale
|
||||||
|
sign that an invocation of this object never returns, since there are
|
||||||
|
no inhabitants of the empty type.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
An invocation of the continuation discards the invocation context and
|
||||||
|
plugs the argument into the captured context.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
\begin{reductions}
|
\begin{reductions}
|
||||||
\slab{Capture} & \EC[\Escape\;k\;\In\;M] &\reducesto& \EC[M[\cont_{\EC}/k]]\\
|
\slab{Capture} & \EC[\Escape\;k\;\In\;M] &\reducesto& \EC[M[\cont_{\EC}/k]]\\
|
||||||
\slab{Resume} & \EC[\Continue~\cont_{\EC'}~V] &\reducesto& \EC'[V]
|
\slab{Resume} & \EC[\Continue~\cont_{\EC'}~V] &\reducesto& \EC'[V]
|
||||||
\end{reductions}
|
\end{reductions}
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
|
The \slab{Capture} rule leaves the context intact such that if the
|
||||||
|
body $M$ does not invoke $k$ then whatever value $M$ reduces is
|
||||||
|
plugged into the context. The \slab{Resume} discards the current
|
||||||
|
context $\EC$ and installs the captured context $\EC'$ with the
|
||||||
|
argument $V$ plugged in.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Sussman and Steele's catch}
|
\paragraph{Sussman and Steele's catch}
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@@ -852,7 +924,7 @@ the correspondence between labels and J.
|
|||||||
\[
|
\[
|
||||||
\ba{@{}l@{~}l}
|
\ba{@{}l@{~}l}
|
||||||
&\sembr{\keyw{begin}\;s_1;\;\keyw{goto}\;L;\;L:\,s_2\;\keyw{end}}\\
|
&\sembr{\keyw{begin}\;s_1;\;\keyw{goto}\;L;\;L:\,s_2\;\keyw{end}}\\
|
||||||
=& \lambda\Unit.\Let\;L \revto \J\,\sembr{s_2}\;\In\;\Let\;\Unit \revto \sembr{s_1}\,\Unit\;\In\;L\,\Unit
|
=& \lambda\Unit.\Let\;L \revto \J\,\sembr{s_2}\;\In\;\Let\;\Unit \revto \sembr{s_1}\,\Unit\;\In\;\Continue~L\,\Unit
|
||||||
\ea
|
\ea
|
||||||
\]
|
\]
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@@ -894,7 +966,7 @@ However, if $g$ does apply its argument, then the value provided to
|
|||||||
the application becomes the return value of $\dec{f}$, e.g.
|
the application becomes the return value of $\dec{f}$, e.g.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
\[
|
\[
|
||||||
\dec{f}~(\lambda return.return~\False) \reducesto^+ \False
|
\dec{f}~(\lambda return.\Continue~return~\False) \reducesto^+ \False
|
||||||
\]
|
\]
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
The function argument provided to $\J$ can intuitively be thought of
|
The function argument provided to $\J$ can intuitively be thought of
|
||||||
@@ -945,9 +1017,12 @@ instead with the $\J$-argument $W$ applied to the value $V$.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Let us end by remarking that the J operator is expressive enough to
|
Let us end by remarking that the J operator is expressive enough to
|
||||||
encode a familiar control operator like $\Callcc$.
|
encode a familiar control operator like $\Callcc$.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
\[
|
\[
|
||||||
\Callcc \defas \lambda f. f\,(\J\,(\lambda x.x))
|
\Callcc \defas \lambda f. f\,(\J\,(\lambda x.x))
|
||||||
\]
|
\]
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{Delimited operators}
|
\subsection{Delimited operators}
|
||||||
Delimited control: Control delimiters form the basis for delimited
|
Delimited control: Control delimiters form the basis for delimited
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user