Results 1 -
4 of
4
From System F to Typed Assembly Language
- ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS
, 1998
"... ..."
TIL: A Type-Directed Optimizing Compiler for ML
- IN ACM SIGPLAN CONFERENCE ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
, 1995
"... We describe a new compiler for Standard ML called TIL, that is based on four technologies: intensional polymorphism, tag-free garbage collection, conventional functional language optimization, and loop optimization. We use intensional polymorphism and tag-free garbage collection to provide specializ ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 219 (35 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We describe a new compiler for Standard ML called TIL, that is based on four technologies: intensional polymorphism, tag-free garbage collection, conventional functional language optimization, and loop optimization. We use intensional polymorphism and tag-free garbage collection to provide specialized representations, even though SML is a polymorphic language. We use conventional functional language optimization to reduce the cost of intensional polymorphism, and loop optimization to generate good code for recursive functions. We present an example of TIL compiling an SML function to machine code, and compare the performance of TIL code against that of a widely used compiler, Standard ML of New Jersey.
A Linearly Typed Assembly Language
- In Workshop on Types in Compilation
"... Today's type-safe low-level languages rely on garbage collection to recycle heap-allocated objects safely. We present LTAL, a safe, low-level, yet simple language that "stands on its own": it guarantees safe execution within a fixed memory space, without relying on external run-time support. We demo ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 136 (35 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Today's type-safe low-level languages rely on garbage collection to recycle heap-allocated objects safely. We present LTAL, a safe, low-level, yet simple language that "stands on its own": it guarantees safe execution within a fixed memory space, without relying on external run-time support. We demonstrate the expressiveness of LTAL by giving a type-preserving compiler for the functional core of ML. But this independence comes at a steep price: LTAL's type system imposes a draconian discipline of linearity that ensures that memory can be reused safely, but prohibits any useful kind of sharing. We present the results of experiments with a prototype LTAL system that show just how high the price of linearity can be.
From System F to Typed Assembly Language (Extended Version)
, 1998
"... We motivate the design of a statically typed assembly language (TAL) and present a typepreserving translation from System F to TAL. The TAL we present is based on a conventional RISC assembly language, but its static type system provides support for enforcing high-level language abstractions, such a ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 8 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We motivate the design of a statically typed assembly language (TAL) and present a typepreserving translation from System F to TAL. The TAL we present is based on a conventional RISC assembly language, but its static type system provides support for enforcing high-level language abstractions, such as closures, tuples, and objects, as well as user-defined abstract data types. The type system ensures that well-typed programs cannot violate these abstractions. In addition, the typing constructs place almost no restrictions on low-level optimizations such as register allocation, instruction selection, or instruction scheduling. Our translation to TAL is specified as a sequence of type-preserving transformations, including CPS and closure conversion phases; type-correct source programs are mapped to type-correct assembly language. A key contribution is an approach to polymorphic closure conversion that is considerably simpler than previous work. The compiler and typed assembly language prov...

