Wednesday, 11 April 2007

Erlang Macro Processor (v1), Part I

Lisp macros. Sigh.

The power at your disposal when you can write code to generate code is... truly awesome.

Unfortunately (as far as my macrophilia is concerned) I happen to prefer the open-source Erlang/OTP implementation far more than any Lisp I have encountered.

I had sullenly resigned myself to a life filled with mere substitution macros (cue the violins, please) when, like an oyster presented with a piece of grit, I was faced with an irritating problem.

It was a dark and moonless night. Quietly the function gained mass as the the minutes inched past midnight and into the early dawn. Its time-consuming mathematical calculation greedily drained CPU cycles every time it was run, and finally, a lightning-quick strike of doom: a simple call vampirically inserted into an inner loop cemented the function's status as the program's major bottleneck. You could almost hear the evil cackle mocking the developer's feeble resistance.

Naturally the first thing I attempted as a cure to this disease was a bit of memoization to cache this function's results. Unfortunately this approach actually had the exact opposite effect to the one I intended... I suspect that the sheer number of key/value pairs held was causing the dictionary to swap to disk; there was an awful lot of hard drive thrashing going on after I made that change.

The additional fact that this routine had a known, contiguous, sequential input range bugged me too. Why should I need to put up with all of the indexing overhead with storing a dictionary of keys and values, when I only really needed a binary array of values to access by (key) offset?

The next obvious step would have been to create a start function to initialise a binary table with the needed results. I did not like this option very much, though, mainly because I would have had to manage the initialised table by either

  • passing the binary as an argument to every function that needs it (or calls a function that needs it, ad infinitum), or
  • storing the binary in the process dictionary (a measure of last resort in a functional program), or
  • creating a separate process to manage the binary and respond to message requests for its contents, a far more complicated solution than I desired.
Another minor consideration was that an initialisation routine would slow down the beginning of my program every time it was run, even if I was only going to run the program on a small range of test values. This might not be so important during production (barring crash/restart situations), but it can definitely slow down an iterative development cycle.

What I really, really wanted to do was create the lookup binary at compile-time and embed it directly in the calculation function as a literal term. Just the sort of thing I would have done automatically in Lisp, without it even registering as a problem.

"Now," the developer says out loud, scratching his head so the audience knows that he is deep in thought, "What can I do to examine the Abstract Syntax Tree of a program and replace portions of it with new code?"

(cue fanfare)

"This is a job for parse_transform!"

(Programmers are strongly advised not to engage in parse transformations and no support is offered for problems encountered.)


  1. Oooh, the suspense... can you ask Mickaƫl to add your blog to Planet Erlang please? Thanks!


Obligatory legal stuff

Unless otherwise noted, all code appearing on this blog is released into the public domain and provided "as-is", without any warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to the warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and noninfringement. In no event shall the author(s) be liable for any claim, damages, or other liability, whether in an action of contract, tort or otherwise, arising from, out of or in connection with the software or the use or other dealings in the software.