Skip to content


Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with HTTPS or Subversion.

Download ZIP
Fetching contributors…

Cannot retrieve contributors at this time

174 lines (109 sloc) 5.893 kb
Somewhere (far) below are some questions on internals of the Clojure compiler,
all related to one particular aspect of the compiler, but one that is ubiquitous.
I've been trying to analyze the context parameter used in parsing and emitting code.
The one of type C, where
public enum C{
STATEMENT, //value ignored
EXPRESSION, //value required
RETURN, //tail position relative to enclosing recur frame
This parameter is passed to IParser.parse() and Expr.emit() and some others,
so it is everywhere.
The first three values are fairly obvious. The last is a bit more mysterious.
And the root call for parsing, to analyze, for both eval and compile pass C.EVAL.
I stepped through all the Compiler code, looking for how the context parameter is used.
Parsing subforms
There are several idioms for how the context is passed on when parsing subforms:
(a) pass the current value through to the subform
(b) pass C.EXPRESSION to the subform -- i.e., the subform's value is required
(c) pass a value to the subform computed by: context == C.EVAL ? context ? C.EXPRESSION
in other words, pass along EVAL if that's the current context,
otherwise, we need a value (do not pass along STATEMENT or RETURN)
(d) ignore -- not used
There are two special cases:
(a) in BodyExpr, all subforms but the last are parsed with C.STATEMENT unless the
current context is C.EVAL (in which case use C.EVAL).
The last subform is parsed with the current context.
(b) The finally clause of a TryExpr is parsed with C.STATEMENT.
Parsing escape
There are several expression types where the form to be parsed wraps itself in
a no-arg function -- (fn [] form) -- and parses the resulting form instead.
Those are:
LetExpr: if ( context == C.EVAL || ( context == C.EXPR && isLoop ) ) ...
LetFnExpr: if ( context == C.EVAL ) ...
ThrowExpr: if ( context == c.EVAL ) ...
TryExpr: if ( context != c.RETURN ) ...
recur context
RecurExpr's parser throws an exception if the context is not C.RETURN.
Emitting code
Emitting subforms
There are several idioms for how the context is passed on to subforms when they are
asked to emit code.
(a) pass through the current context to subform emit calls
(c) pass c.EXPRESSION to subform emit calls
(a) ignored
Again, BodyExpr and TryExpr are the exceptions, just as in parsing:
(a) BodyExpr: all subforms but last are emitted with context C.STATEMENT,
the last form is emitted using the current context
(b) TryExpr: the finally clause is emitted with C.STATEMENT. Also, if the
current context is not C.STATEMENT, code is emitted to save and restore
the value from the body's evaluation, giving a value to be returned to the caller.
Popping the stack
The context is used to determine when a value needs to be popped from the runtime
evaluation stack:
if(context == C.STATEMENT) gen.pop();
Clearing locals
Finally the context is used to force locals to be cleared before a tail call:
if(context == C.RETURN)
FnMethod method = (FnMethod) METHOD.deref();
Getting started
When #eval is handed a form to evaluate, it does of several things (after macroexpansion):
(a) If the form is (do form-1 form-2 ... ), eval each form-i in turn and return
the value of the last one.
(b) If the form is an IPersistentCollection that does not begin with Symbol whose
name starts with "def", wrap the form in a no-arg function -- (fn [] form),
parse it starting with context C.EXPRESSION, then instantiate and eval the function.
(c) otherwise, parse it starting with context C.EVAL.
When #compile1 is handed a form to compile, it is similar, except case (b) is eliminated.
The reason I'm so interested in this is that as currently written, the compiler
in ClojureCLR does not do _any_ of this. However, I have to add a little more
machinery to make sure that I catch recur calls occurring in the wrong places,
so I found analyzing the machinery in ClojureJVM that handles that.
And I've learned that I ignore things that Rich has done at my own peril.
So I'm trying to make sure I'm not missing some crucial aspect of the use of
Context in parsing forms and emitting code.
(0) What am I missing? (read that question any way you want)
(1) Is there a succinct description for the meaning of C.EVAL?
(2) Why are 'forms that of the form (defXXX ... )' singled out for special treatment
in eval?
(3) (T or F) The forms that wrap themselves as (fn [] form) do so because they need
to make sure they have a context for local variable mangling, closing over, etc.,
that is provided only by a FnExpr. (Those forms are let, letfn, throw, try.)
(4) Do we need an interpreted eval? Is there a problem with just wrapping any form
in an (fn [] form) and processing that?
(5) If there is no need for the three separate cases in eval, is there any need for the
information carried by a context of C.Eval?
(6) If we don't have to worry about popping values from the runtime stack where values
are being ignored, is there any need for the information carried by C.STATEMENT?
(In ClojureCLR, the DLR handles this automatically.)
And while I'm at it: C.RETURN is used for tail-call detection. Recur is obvious.
Not so obvious?
(7) Are there any succinct examples of the problem being solved by emitClearLocals?
(8) Why is emitClearLocals not called in more places? (It is called for InstanceMethodExpr,
InvokeExpr, NewExpr, and StaticMethodExpr.)
Jump to Line
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.