OK, Perhaps playing around with your Command code 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/ats-lang-users/fICcWumT9RE/x0LW1StuAQAJ>, 
and if needed, adding some extra syntax for it in ATS3, might be promising.

Incidentally, why is it needed to be a polymorphic function instead of a 
function template?

Belated apologies for hijacking this discussion.

On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 9:55:51 AM UTC-4, gmhwxi wrote:
>
> No such control as far as I know.
>
> Personally, I feel that the design of effect-tracking in ATS2 is a failure.
>
> I am not yet sure how to do it in ATS3. Or do it at all?
>
> On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 9:50:45 AM UTC-4, Brandon Barker wrote:
>>
>> After sleeping on it, I realize part of my last email doesn't have much 
>> merit: namely the part about applications being able to enforce purity by 
>> using "pure" functions high up in the call stack  (e.g. program in that 
>> example); most of such functions are exactly the ones that need to be 
>> impure, due to having to also deal with IO.
>>
>> Would it be possible to have the compiler allow the user to control the 
>> default effect type of functions?
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 10:34:11 PM UTC-4, Brandon Barker wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually maybe it isn't necessary to have compiler flags - it should be 
>>> reasonable, *I think*, to just have your top-level program function, call 
>>> it program, be pure, then you could have e.g.
>>>
>>> main0 = program
>>>
>>> Which would force all other functions below it to be pure. Using effmask 
>>> if absolutely necessary - maybe have the compiler print warnings for these 
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Also, if main0 = pureProgram is too extreme, or if one is making a 
>>> library, then either important portions of the program, or of the public 
>>> API, could be made pure (or effectfully annotated) in the way that one 
>>> wants to do.
>>> Maybe this is even being done already by ATS programmers to some extent.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 10:27:56 PM UTC-4, Brandon Barker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> OK, cool, I'm not sure which of the listed effects 
>>>> <https://github.com/githwxi/ATS-Postiats/wiki/effects>it is catching 
>>>> on, but we can all agree it isn't pure!
>>>>
>>>> I think this could still be useful. Using effmask like this seems a bit 
>>>> like using unsafePerformIO 
>>>> <https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/System-IO-Unsafe.html#v:unsafePerformIO>
>>>>  
>>>> in Haskell; not great, and the one time I've seen it used in a library, it 
>>>> has bitten me - since the library author violated one of the safety 
>>>> tenants 
>>>> - but supposedly there are some good uses for it ;-).
>>>>
>>>> In the end it is hard to get this perfect (you'd need some really nice 
>>>> static analysis tools to check what you're linking in from C-land or other 
>>>> FFIs I imagine), but maybe we can work towards safer code in this way 
>>>> without undue burden on the programmer. 
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 10:11:38 PM UTC-4, Richard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 9:54:57 PM UTC-4, Brandon Barker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Richard - thanks for the instructive examples; I clarified a 
>>>>>> related point on the wiki. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-4, Richard wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #include "share/atspre_staload.hats"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> implement main0() = ()
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // If I am not mistaken, all functions in ats have all effects (i.e. 
>>>>>>> :<1>) by default.
>>>>>>> // note, :<0> is equivalent to :<>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // Just some thoughts....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fun terminating .<>. (n: int):<> int = n * n
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // Here we require to provide proof that the function terminates
>>>>>>> // so, we just insist that it does (.<>.)
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // Well it does not seem to be a very effectful function so sure
>>>>>>> // though, what is the significance of purity in this case?
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // Effects tracking in ats is not exactly a contract
>>>>>>> // For example,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> val terminate = terminating(0xb505)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // This typechecks fine however, do you notice something strange 
>>>>>>> about the resulting value?
>>>>>>> // Passing a value larger than the square root of INTMAX causes 
>>>>>>> arithmetic overflow...
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // In this case, what good is a function annotated as pure if it can 
>>>>>>> produce arithmetic overflow?
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>> // Let us look at a different example, lets use dependent types to 
>>>>>>> flush out this potential bug...
>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> stadef IMAX = 2147483647
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fun dependent {n:int | n*n <= IMAX} (n: int(n)): int(n*n) = n*n
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // 'depend' below fails typechecking,
>>>>>>> // unsolved constraint:
>>>>>>> // (46341 * 46341) <= IMAX
>>>>>>> val depend = dependent(0xb505)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // however this typechecks,
>>>>>>> val depend = dependent(0xb504)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 1:14:19 PM UTC-4, Brandon Barker wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Guys,  Thanks for the discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual I don't fully understand or recall some of the relevant 
>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the online editor I quickly tried out this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> fun double (n: int) :<1> int = n + n
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> val () = println! ("double(5) = ", double(5))
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which works. But changing :<1> to :<0> fails to compile; i also 
>>>>>>>> tried a non-polymorphic identity function for ints and had the same 
>>>>>>>> result. 
>>>>>>>> So what does :<0> really mean?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think if we had (1), a way to keep track of purity, i.e., any 
>>>>>>>> expressions returning unit must be equivalent to the expression () 
>>>>>>>> (hopefully this isn't hard to check..), and (2), a way to tell the 
>>>>>>>> compiler 
>>>>>>>> to assume that ":" assumes :<0> by default, then we might just get 
>>>>>>>> purity 
>>>>>>>> checking done for free.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that requiring all functions to be pure in the current 
>>>>>>> implementation of ats2 would produce an environment that would greatly 
>>>>>>> decrease programming productivity :)
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree, that in its current definition, "pure" is actually stronger 
>>>>>> than what I had in mind. I think letting the programmer choose the 
>>>>>> default 
>>>>>> effect type of functions could be useful when executing a build (though 
>>>>>> it 
>>>>>> would also have to take this into account, ideally, when linking with 
>>>>>> other 
>>>>>> ATS libraries).  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was going to see if I could get what I wanted, starting by doing 
>>>>>> this, and playing around with eliminating effects that don't jive with 
>>>>>> my 
>>>>>> notion of "sort of pure" ;-):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> implement
>>>>>> main0 () = {
>>>>>>  val () = println! ("double(5) = ", double(5))
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> fun double .<>. (n: int) :<0> int = (
>>>>>>   // print 'h';
>>>>>>   n + n
>>>>>> )
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Unfortunately, this resulted in an error that I don't have time to 
>>>>>> dive into tonight (was using version 0.3.11 out of convenience). Online, 
>>>>>> it 
>>>>>> works (see attached image). However, if I uncomment the print 'h' line, 
>>>>>> it 
>>>>>> fails, but i can't see the error online.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When un-commenting 
>>>>> // print 'h';  
>>>>> the typechecker issues a warning stating that 
>>>>> some disallowed effects may be incurred: 1
>>>>> This is expected behavior as the function signature states that it is 
>>>>> pure (:<0>)
>>>>>
>>>>> To further illustrate the difficulty in relying on effects, one can 
>>>>> just as easily silence the compiler with one of the 
>>>>> "ats-swiss-army-knives",
>>>>> fun double .<>. (n: int):<> int =
>>>>> (
>>>>>   $effmask{1}(print 'h');
>>>>>   n + n
>>>>> )
>>>>>
>>>>> Here, we just tell the compiler "look, just ignore this one" :)
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ats-lang-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ats-lang-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ats-lang-users/1c4e3296-1c65-4685-b897-020bf297c5a7%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to