xvm
The-Spiral-Language
Our great sponsors
xvm | The-Spiral-Language | |
---|---|---|
110 | 33 | |
189 | 900 | |
0.0% | - | |
9.8 | 9.6 | |
6 days ago | 4 days ago | |
Java | Python | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | Mozilla Public License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
xvm
-
Implementing arrays (and hash tables and ..) in a minimal ML with a C API
Have a look at the ecstasy library for the language definitions of these types.
-
Polymorphic static members
2) Funky interfaces: This is an Ecstasy interface that declares abstract static members (e.g. functions), which can then be implemented on any class and overridden on any sub-class, such that they can be invoked by type (instead of this), and virtually resolved (late bound at runtime) based on the type known at compile time. The best known example, of course, is Hashable, because it has to guarantee that a type implements both equals() and hashCode() on the same class, and the implementation is tied to the type, and not to the this. (C# added a similar feature last year in version 11.)
-
How do you parse function calls?
I'm just going to warn you in advance that invocation is one of the hardest things in the compiler to make easy. In other words, the nicer your language's "developer experience" is around invocation, the more hell you're going to have to go through to get there. The AST nodes for Name( (NameExpression) and Invoke( (InvocationExpression) alone are 7kloc in the Ecstasy implementation, for example -- but the result is well worth it.
-
What are some important differences between the popular versions of OOP (e.g. Java, Python) vs. the purist's versions of OOP (e.g. Smalltalk)?
Ecstasy uses message passing automatically behind the scenes for asynchronous calls, but the message passing isn't visible at the language level (i.e. there is no "message object" or something like that visible). Basically, all Ecstasy code is executing on a fiber inside a service, and services are all running concurrently, so from any service realm to any service realm, the communication is by message.
-
Is your language solving a real world problem?
Regarding Ecstasy, we did not set out to build a new language; we actually set out to solve a real world problem. Specifically, we wanted to be able to dramatically improve the density of workloads in data centers, by at least two orders of magnitude in the case of lightly used applications. Our initial goal was to create a runtime design that would support 10,000 stateful application instances on a single server. Let's call it the "a10k" problem 🤣 ... a tribute to the c10k problem from 1999. We refer to our goal as "zero carbon compute", i.e. we want to push the power and hardware cost for an application to as close to zero as possible; you can't reach zero, but you can get close. If we succeed, we will help reduce the electricity used in data centers over the next few decades by a significant percentage.
-
How do you tokenize multi char tokens.
Generally, left to right, one character at a time. If you’re looking for example code, here’s a simple hand-built lexer.
-
Have you written your own language in itself yet?
Parts of Ecstasy are now implemented in Ecstasy. Here's the Lexer, for example.
-
Top programming languages created in the 2010's on GitHub by stars
Ecstasy
-
What languages have been created *specifically* for the purpose of being JIT-compiled?
Ecstasy and the xvm were designed assuming an adaptive runtime compiler (similar in concept to the Hotspot compiler for Java), but not necessarily using a JIT.
-
What are you doing about async programming models? Best? Worst? Strengths? Weaknesses?
A Future reference has the various capabilities that you'd imagine, taking lambdas for thenDo(), whenComplete(), etc. The reference, in the above example, is a local variable, so you just obtain it using the C-style & operator:
The-Spiral-Language
-
Does This Language Exist?
Try Spiral for a functional response to the system level programming demands. It has an F#, C, and a Python backend.
-
How do I get around the lack of MailboxProcessor in Fable?
I did the language server for Spiral using Hopac. It involved turning the entirety of what would have been the sequential compilation pipeline into a promise stream.
-
Are there any good resources on reflection in Fable?
Sigh, despite using F# for so long, I've always avoided tackling .NET reflection, but I know from experience (of programming in Spiral) that this is a perfect place to introduce these techniques. Type systems like F#'s really hit their limits when it comes to serializing data across platform and language boundaries, so this is The place to demonstrate the use such methods.
-
why isn't functional more popular?
But a language that support programming in a staged functional programming style, like my own Spiral would actually be very suitable for gamedev, I think more than C# itself. It has compiler guarantees for a lot of things that F# doesn't, and what in other languages would require metaprogramming is just regular programming in it.
-
Ask HN: How do I get the most benefit out of my programming language?
I originally started work on [Spiral](https://github.com/mrakgr/The-Spiral-Language) back in late 2016 because I wanted a functional language in which I could program novel AI hardware that hadn't existed at the time, and still doesn't, but it won't be long before it arrives. It took 3 years of full time work to get it to its current standard of quality, and I'd really feel comfortable programming new hardware devices in my favored functional style. I've designed Spiral so it is both extremely powerful, easy to use while being efficient enough to program devices like GPUs that can't even use heap allocation for their objects.
I am not really concerned about what I'll do when I get access to Tenstorrent chips in six months; my personal needs for the language are met. But I would like it if I could spread the language more broadly, make it useful for people other than myself and get people to sponsor my work on it.
Here is the value proposition of Spiral.
It is a high-level functional PL that has some features that other languages don't, but that isn't really the point. On mainstream devices like the x86 ones there are a lot of programming languages that are good, and it would be tedious to use Spiral to compile to such platforms compared to using such languages directly. It is a bit how ReasonML compiles to JS. Back when I tried it I found using Typescript easier to deal with. So that is not where I'd like to go into, though using Spiral would have benefits in certain areas.
Rather, while reading the [CNX blog](https://www.cnx-software.com/) I realized that while consumer facing AI chips are not here yet, there is a lot of hardware development in the embedded space. They are heterogenous architecture. They have GPU and TPUs in addition to CPUs. And these cross platform interactions within the same system is something that existing languages are really poor at tackling.
If you look at Python or C#, for example, you can't really program the GPU on them directly. They are CPU focused, and don't have the right semantics and would be too inefficient to program devices like GPUs directly. The way I've designed Spiral is that you can program the CPU and the GPU and whatever else from within the same language.
It is not suitable for just GPUs, check this [demo out](https://github.com/mrakgr/PIM-Programming-In-Spiral-UPMEM-Demo). I recently did a backend for UPMEM devices, which are the first commercialized Process-In-Memory chips. I've posted the link to this on HN yesterday and on the Reddit embedded sub, but I got zero interest. And this is really a pity because that map kernel I've demoed is actually a big deal. Back when I first started working on Spiral, it took me 1.5 years of full time work to get to the point where I could write a program like that in the language. And without backend nesting of the kind that Spiral offers, it is impossible to write those kinds of programs no matter how skilled one is as a programmer.
The kind of backend nesting I've demonstrated is not something you can do in F#, Python or any of the languages that I know of. I could easily create such backends for many kinds of hardware. And people would benefit from that because unlike the mainstream computing devices, the hardware coming down the pipeline will have poor language support, nothing on the level of what Spiral offers. For the kinds of heterogeneous architectures I am envisioning, the language designs that are good in the CPU-dominant era, will simply not be suited in the heterogeneous era.
I need chances to demonstrate how good Spiral is, but I am not sure how to get them. If I do not get them, the future of computing will be a lot worse off. I wasn't there when Cuda was incumbent so I missed the boat on that, but I'd like it if Spiral became dominant on future computing devices. Not because I was the one who made the language, but simply because no other design is as suited for them.
-
PIM (Processing-In-Memory) Course
I am not shameless enough to plug Spiral in the main post, but if you are a PIM company or an user of them and want better PL support and tooling, get in touch with me. I'd love to get a chance to play with them.
-
September 2022 monthly "What are you working on?" thread
Two months ago I did a ref counted C backend for Spiral so I might as well plug it now. Since then I've gotten tired of 3d art, and decided to just start writing Heaven's Key.
-
Callbacks without closures?
I just happened to notice that Spiral has a C code generator now. Maybe you can just use that since it's designed with staging in mind and avoiding heap allocation.
-
Multistage Programming / First Class runtime compiler support
Spiral
-
Are there examples of programming language compilers that evaluate the side-effect free parts of the program at compile-time?
Another term to search for is partial evaluation. An interesting language that by default evaluates everything at compile time is Spiral, developed by someone frequenting this subreddit.
What are some alternatives?
seed7 - Source code of Seed7
lust - A fast, auto-optimizing image server designed for high throughput and caching; Now that is hot.
list-exp - Regular expression-like syntax for list operations [Moved to: https://github.com/phenax/elxr]
kuroko - Dialect of Python with explicit variable declaration and block scoping, with a lightweight and easy-to-embed bytecode compiler and interpreter.
gaiman - Gaiman: Text based game engine and programming language
TablaM - The practical relational programing language for data-oriented applications
exp-flow - experimental rule-based programming formalism under construction [Moved to: https://github.com/contrast-zone/canon]
ghc - Mirror of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler. Please submit issues and patches to GHC's Gitlab instance (https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc). First time contributors are encouraged to get started with the newcomers info (https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/contributing).
cish - Go + Generics + Sum Types
RustScript2 - RustScript is a functional scripting language with as much relation to Rust as Javascript has to Java.
Vale - Compiler for the Vale programming language - http://vale.dev/