Poly/ML

polyml@lists.polyml.org

2 participants
698 discussions

Linking exported object files
by David.Matthews＠prolingua.co.uk 02 Aug '13

02 Aug '13

I've updated the "polyc" script so that as well as accepting an ML source file to compile and link it can also be used to link object files created with PolyML.export. Switching to static linking by default in SVN has turned up a few problems. In particular it seems that it's important to include the libraries required by libpolyml. The problem is that this can depend on how it was built. In particular, the configure script will use GMP if it is present but falls back to the internal arbitrary precision package if it is not. That has the effect that if GMP was detected during the build process then the linking line must include -lgmp. However, if GMP is not present then including -lgmp will result in an error message. This makes it rather difficult to write a general purpose linking script. The linking line found at http://www.polyml.org/FAQ.html#standalone has gone through several versions and still has to be tweaked. It should now just require polyc -o hello hello.o Although "polyc" is a shell script it is produced during the build process and includes the appropriate options for linking depending on what the configure script found. The name "polyc" was meant to be analogous to "cc" or "gcc". I don't know whether it might be better to use the name "poly" for both the "batch" and interactive versions depending on the options. Any ideas? David

2 2

Linking exported object files
by David.Matthews＠prolingua.co.uk 01 Aug '13

01 Aug '13

On 01/08/2013 16:23, Rob Arthan wrote: > > On 1 Aug 2013, at 16:07, David Matthews wrote: >> ... In particular, the configure script will use GMP if it is >> present but falls back to the internal arbitrary precision package >> if it is not. That has the effect that if GMP was detected during >> the build process then the linking line must include -lgmp. >> However, if GMP is not present then including -lgmp will result in >> an error message. > > What are the advantages in building with GMP? If you are working with large arbitrary precision values particularly multiplying and dividing GMP is likely to be significantly faster. The default code is fairly naive. It's unlikely to make any difference for values that are only slightly longer than short precision (31-bits on 32-bit; 63-bits on 64-bit) and doesn't affect arithmetic on short precision values. Regards, David

1 0

Fwd: Performance experiment with Poly/ML
by jesus-maria.aransay＠unirioja.es 30 Jul '13

30 Jul '13

Hi David and Matthew, thanks for your encouraging answers. The SML code directly generated from Isabelle/HOL is available from the input [ADb] in the paper bibliography, in http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jodivaso/Isabelle/Gauss-Jordan/ under the link "View the generated code". The matrices used for the benchmarks are in a zip file (9MB compressed, 160MB uncompressed) in the link "Download the benchmarks" in the previous website. Uncompressing the folder three different folders appear (RAT, REAL, Z2). In each of these folders there is a "Readme" file where we describe how we carried out the computations (we would be very glad to hear if there is a more proper way, both in MLton and Poly/ML). The segmentation fault was raised with Poly/ML 5.5 trying to compute the matrix "Benchmarks/REAL/800_real.sml". There is also the issue of lack of performance from Poly/ML 5.5 to Poly/ML 5.2. As an example, the matrix "Benchmarks/REAL/200_real.sml" sums up 3.7 (processing) + 0.7 (executing) seconds with Poly/ML 5.5 and 31.0 (processing) + 0.4 (executing) seconds with Poly/ML 5.2 (the version shipped as an Ubuntu package); the same matrix in MLton took 9145.0 (processing) + 0.5 (executing) seconds. Thanks in advance for your advice, do not hesitate to contact us for further questions, Jesus On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Matthew Fluet <matthew.fluet at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:03 AM, David Matthews > <David.Matthews at prolingua.co.uk> wrote: >> On 25/07/2013 11:29, Jesus Aransay wrote: >>> >>> Jose Divas?n and I wrote a short paper for a Spanish workshop on >>> functional programming ("Taller de Programaci?n Funcional 2013", >>> http://babel.ls.fi.upm.es/tpf2013/) in which we test a SML program >>> obtained with the Isabelle code generator tool to perform the Gauss >>> Jordan elimination algorithm over matrices. >> >> That is interesting work. Is it possible to get a copy of the code you ran >> for the various tests so I can check this out? > > Seconded! I would love to investigate why MLton is performing so > poorly on the input processing. > > -Matthew > > -- Jes?s Mar?a Aransay Azofra Universidad de La Rioja Dpto. de Matem?ticas y Computaci?n tlf.: (+34) 941299438 fax: (+34) 941299460 mail: jesus-maria.aransay at unirioja.es ; web: http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jearansa Edificio Luis Vives, c/ Luis de Ulloa s/n, 26004 Logro?o, Espa?a -- Jes?s Mar?a Aransay Azofra Universidad de La Rioja Dpto. de Matem?ticas y Computaci?n tlf.: (+34) 941299438 fax: (+34) 941299460 mail: jesus-maria.aransay at unirioja.es ; web: http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jearansa Edificio Luis Vives, c/ Luis de Ulloa s/n, 26004 Logro?o, Espa?a

4 3

Performance experiment with Poly/ML
by jesus-maria.aransay＠unirioja.es 25 Jul '13

25 Jul '13

Dear all, Jose Divas?n and I wrote a short paper for a Spanish workshop on functional programming ("Taller de Programaci?n Funcional 2013", http://babel.ls.fi.upm.es/tpf2013/) in which we test a SML program obtained with the Isabelle code generator tool to perform the Gauss Jordan elimination algorithm over matrices. We carried out performance experiments with MLton and Poly/ML with three different types of matrices. Matrices whose inputs were real numbers (SML type Real.real), matrices whose inputs were fractions of integers (IntInf.int) and also matrices whose inputs where an ad hoc implementation of the field Z2 by means of "0::IntInf.int" and "1::IntInf.int". The code generation process and the types mapping from Isabelle to SML are explained in pp. 1 - 4 of the article. The benchmarks comparing Poly/ML and MLton performance are detailed in pp. 4 - 8. Briefly, the results show that: - Poly/ML 5.5 performs better than MLton with matrices over Z2 (see page 6); - MLton behaves better than Poly/ML with matrices whose inputs are fractions of "IntInf.int" (see page 7); - Poly/ML 5.2 outperforms MLton over matrices of type "Real.real", but reaches a segmentation fault with matrices of size 800 * 800 (in computers with a RAM of 4GB). Quite surprisingly for us, Poly/ML 5.5 performs worse than Poly/ML 5.2 over matrices with inputs of type "Real.real". Our intention was just to identify the best performing setting (for compilation and execution) for our future work with matrices, and we did not get to explore the roots and reasons of the previous results. Anywhere, we considered that the results could be interesting for somebody in the mailing list. We would also be very pleased to get any feedback on the reasons for the previous results. The paper is available in the following link http://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/cse/uploads/ForMath/pavlap Thanks in advance for your interest, Jesus -- Jes?s Mar?a Aransay Azofra Universidad de La Rioja Dpto. de Matem?ticas y Computaci?n tlf.: (+34) 941299438 fax: (+34) 941299460 mail: jesus-maria.aransay at unirioja.es ; web: http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jearansa Edificio Luis Vives, c/ Luis de Ulloa s/n, 26004 Logro?o, Espa?a

3 2

Sourceforge and SVN
by David.Matthews＠prolingua.co.uk 24 Jun '13

24 Jun '13

I have "upgraded" the Poly/ML site on SourceForge (there didn't seem to be any choice) and as a consequence the subversion site has changed. Anyone who is following Poly/ML SVN will need to change to the new site. For trunk this is svn checkout svn://svn.code.sf.net/p/polyml/code/trunk polyml and for the 5.5 fixes branch svn co svn://svn.code.sf.net/p/polyml/code/fixes-5.5 polyml I am currently working on the stages of the compiler that process and optimise the intermediate code. These are parts of the compiler that haven't been looked at for a very long time and some of it was obviously translated automatically from my original Poly code back in the 1980s. I tend to commit changes fairly regularly rather than accumulate a long set of changes and commit all at once. This does mean that things could be broken and only fixed by a later commit but it makes it much easier to find a bug if it shows up much later. Season's greetings and best wishes for the New Year, David

3 5

ArraySlice.copy is inefficient
by peter.lammich＠uni-muenster.de 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

Hi all, (Referring to "PolyML 5.5.0 release") I am trying to copy the initial part of an array into another array, something like OCamls: "Array.blit src 0 dst 0 len" In PolyML, I have Array.copy, that copies the whole array, i.e., fixes len=length src, which is to restrictive for my purpose. I can solve my problem with "ArraySlice.copy {src=ArraySlice.slice(src,0,SOME len),di=0,dst=dst}" However, this solution has very poor performance. Looking at the code, it becomes clear why: Array.copy is implemented natively by "move_words", however, ArraySlice.copy is implemented as a recursive function inside ML. This is a performance difference of roughly two orders of magnitude! There is a comment on ArraySlice.copy that "We can't use System_move_words because of the potential overlap problem." However, looking at the implementations of move_words, I find: x86asm.asm: ;# Must deal with the case of overlapping segments correctly. (which the implementation there does) run_time.cpp: memmove(dest, source, words*sizeof(PolyWord)); /* must work for overlapping segments. */ (which it does according to C++ specification) Nevertheless, a quick test reveals that System_move_words does not work for overlapping memory! What am I missing? So, this results in a few questions: 1) Is there a fast solution two my problem within the SML-standard, where I can even assume that src and dst are different arrays? 2) Can ArraySlice.copy be patched to use System_move_words after a check that the arrays are actually not the same? 3) Where is the code executed by System_move_words, and can this be fixed to correctly handle overlapping segments? Best, Peter

2 4

Large file support
by loganjerry＠gmail.com 13 Jun '13

13 Jun '13

Greetings, Fedora is planning to switch to btrfs as the default filesystem at some future point. This may cause problems for some 32-bit applications, because btrfs uses 64-bit inode numbers (see [1], for example). This can cause stat() calls to fail with EOVERFLOW, just because the inode number doesn't fit into the 32-bit stat structure, even if the caller doesn't care about the inode number. I'm attaching a candidate patch for polyml to avoid this issue. It enables large file support on systems where that makes sense, which builds with a 64-bit stat structure on 32-bit systems, and makes some types (such as off_t) larger. I seem to have a different version of automake than you, so I am not including the generated files in this patch. While you're changing stuff, though, may I suggest dropping AC_FUNC_SETVBUF_REVERSED from configure.ac? Autoconf complains that it is obsolete, and the one use of setvbuf() in the code ignores the results of this test anyway. References: [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/10374 Regards, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/

2 1

Suspicious memset in 5.5
by loganjerry＠gmail.com 11 Jun '13

11 Jun '13

Greetings, I maintain the polyml package for the Fedora Linux distrubtion. I was just doing a build with the latest addition to polyml-5.5-fixes when I spotted this compiler output: elfexport.cpp: In member function 'virtual void ELFExport::exportStore()': elfexport.cpp:612:31: warning: argument to 'sizeof' in 'void* memset(void*, int, size_t)' call is the same pointer type '_memTableEntry*' as the destination; expected '_memTableEntry' or an explicit length [-Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess] memset(memTable, 0, sizeof(memTable)); So only the first pointer-length bytes of memTable are being cleared. Shouldn't that be: memset(memTable, 0, sizeof(*memTable) * memTableEntries); ? Regards, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/

2 1

crashes
by michael.norrish＠nicta.com.au 07 Jun '13

07 Jun '13

Using PolyML 5.5.0 as downloaded from Sourceforge, we can reliably produce: Exception- InternalError: indirect - invalid constant address raised while compiling Exception- InternalError: indirect - invalid constant address raised while compiling We can also regularly, but somewhat less reliably, produce hol.builder: gc_mark_phase.cpp:199: bool MTGCProcessMarkPointers::ForkNew(PolyObject*): Assertion `marker != 0' failed. Aborted (core dumped) where hol.builder is the name of our dumped heap. Are there any obvious things we can try to get around these problems? Thanks, Michael

2 1

(no subject)
by jesus-maria.aransay＠unirioja.es 24 May '13

24 May '13

Dear all, this is my first mail to the list, so first I wanted to say hello and kindly ask you for forgiveness if I break any conventions that usually apply in the list. We were doing some program performance testing with Poly ML 5.5 and we detected the following behavior when trying to use the information provided by "PolyML.timing" (I tried to produce a toy example). fun fact (n : int) = (if n = 0 then 1 else n * fact (n -1 )); PolyML.timing true; open TextIO; val foo = openOut ("foo"); open Int; output (foo, toString (fact (10000))); The last function returns a "run" time of "0.1" in a Linux machine, but "11.7" (approx) in our Windows machine, when the real time can be checked in both machines to be of the order of "0.1" (actually, the Windows machine in our case has much better hardware and is indeed faster in computations, this is the reason why we wanted to stick to it). Somehow, the timing information provided in the Windows machine is not correct. It scales to greater computations, where 200 seconds of real run time are shown in Windows as maybe 2000. In our Linux machine we have used the polyml version shipped with Isabelle 2013, whereas in the Windows machine we are using the binary version for Windows obtained from sourceforge. Are we doing anything wrong? Is this a known issue? Thanks for any hints, Jesus -- Jes?s Mar?a Aransay Azofra Universidad de La Rioja Dpto. de Matem?ticas y Computaci?n tlf.: (+34) 941299438 fax: (+34) 941299460 mail: jesus-maria.aransay at unirioja.es ; web: http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jearansa Edificio Luis Vives, c/ Luis de Ulloa s/n, 26004 Logro?o, Espa?a

2 2

← Newer
1
...
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
...
70
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Poly/ML