Beginnings of CPS section in manual

[bpt/guile.git] / doc / ref / compiler.texi

@c -*-texinfo-*-
@c This is part of the GNU Guile Reference Manual.
@c Copyright (C)  2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
@c   Free Software Foundation, Inc.
@c See the file guile.texi for copying conditions.

@node Compiling to the Virtual Machine
@section Compiling to the Virtual Machine

Compilers!  The word itself inspires excitement and awe, even among
experienced practitioners.  But a compiler is just a program: an
eminently hackable thing.  This section aims to to describe Guile's
compiler in such a way that interested Scheme hackers can feel
comfortable reading and extending it.

@xref{Read/Load/Eval/Compile}, if you're lost and you just wanted to
know how to compile your @code{.scm} file.

@menu
* Compiler Tower::                   
* The Scheme Compiler::                   
* Tree-IL::                 
* Continuation-Passing Style::                 
* Bytecode::                
* Writing New High-Level Languages::
* Extending the Compiler::
@end menu

@node Compiler Tower
@subsection Compiler Tower

Guile's compiler is quite simple -- its @emph{compilers}, to put it more
accurately.  Guile defines a tower of languages, starting at Scheme and
progressively simplifying down to languages that resemble the VM
instruction set (@pxref{Instruction Set}).

Each language knows how to compile to the next, so each step is simple
and understandable.  Furthermore, this set of languages is not hardcoded
into Guile, so it is possible for the user to add new high-level
languages, new passes, or even different compilation targets.

Languages are registered in the module, @code{(system base language)}:

@example
(use-modules (system base language))
@end example

They are registered with the @code{define-language} form.

@deffn {Scheme Syntax} define-language @
                       [#:name] [#:title] [#:reader] [#:printer] @
                       [#:parser=#f] [#:compilers='()] @
                       [#:decompilers='()] [#:evaluator=#f] @
                       [#:joiner=#f] [#:for-humans?=#t] @
                       [#:make-default-environment=make-fresh-user-module]
Define a language.

This syntax defines a @code{<language>} object, bound to @var{name} in
the current environment.  In addition, the language will be added to the
global language set.  For example, this is the language definition for
Scheme:

@example
(define-language scheme
  #:title       "Scheme"
  #:reader      (lambda (port env) ...)
  #:compilers   `((tree-il . ,compile-tree-il))
  #:decompilers `((tree-il . ,decompile-tree-il))
  #:evaluator   (lambda (x module) (primitive-eval x))
  #:printer     write
  #:make-default-environment (lambda () ...))
@end example
@end deffn

The interesting thing about having languages defined this way is that
they present a uniform interface to the read-eval-print loop.  This
allows the user to change the current language of the REPL:

@example
scheme@@(guile-user)> ,language tree-il
Happy hacking with Tree Intermediate Language!  To switch back, type `,L scheme'.
tree-il@@(guile-user)> ,L scheme
Happy hacking with Scheme!  To switch back, type `,L tree-il'.
scheme@@(guile-user)> 
@end example

Languages can be looked up by name, as they were above.

@deffn {Scheme Procedure} lookup-language name
Looks up a language named @var{name}, autoloading it if necessary.

Languages are autoloaded by looking for a variable named @var{name} in
a module named @code{(language @var{name} spec)}.

The language object will be returned, or @code{#f} if there does not
exist a language with that name.
@end deffn

Defining languages this way allows us to programmatically determine
the necessary steps for compiling code from one language to another.

@deffn {Scheme Procedure} lookup-compilation-order from to
Recursively traverses the set of languages to which @var{from} can
compile, depth-first, and return the first path that can transform
@var{from} to @var{to}. Returns @code{#f} if no path is found.

This function memoizes its results in a cache that is invalidated by
subsequent calls to @code{define-language}, so it should be quite
fast.
@end deffn

There is a notion of a ``current language'', which is maintained in the
@code{current-language} parameter, defined in the core @code{(guile)}
module.  This language is normally Scheme, and may be rebound by the
user.  The run-time compilation interfaces
(@pxref{Read/Load/Eval/Compile}) also allow you to choose other source
and target languages.

The normal tower of languages when compiling Scheme goes like this:

@itemize
@item Scheme
@item Tree Intermediate Language (Tree-IL)
@item Continuation-Passing Style (CPS)
@item Bytecode
@end itemize

As discussed before (@pxref{Object File Format}), bytecode is in ELF
format, ready to be serialized to disk.  But when compiling Scheme at
run time, you want a Scheme value: for example, a compiled procedure.
For this reason, so as not to break the abstraction, Guile defines a
fake language at the bottom of the tower:

@itemize
@item Value
@end itemize

Compiling to @code{value} loads the bytecode into a procedure, turning
cold bytes into warm code.

Perhaps this strangeness can be explained by example:
@code{compile-file} defaults to compiling to bytecode, because it
produces object code that has to live in the barren world outside the
Guile runtime; but @code{compile} defaults to compiling to @code{value},
as its product re-enters the Guile world.

@c FIXME: This doesn't work anymore :(  Should we add some kind of
@c special GC pass, or disclaim this kind of code, or what?

Indeed, the process of compilation can circulate through these
different worlds indefinitely, as shown by the following quine:

@example
((lambda (x) ((compile x) x)) '(lambda (x) ((compile x) x)))
@end example

@node The Scheme Compiler
@subsection The Scheme Compiler

The job of the Scheme compiler is to expand all macros and all of Scheme
to its most primitive expressions.  The definition of ``primitive
expression'' is given by the inventory of constructs provided by
Tree-IL, the target language of the Scheme compiler: procedure calls,
conditionals, lexical references, and so on.  This is described more
fully in the next section.

The tricky and amusing thing about the Scheme-to-Tree-IL compiler is
that it is completely implemented by the macro expander.  Since the
macro expander has to run over all of the source code already in order
to expand macros, it might as well do the analysis at the same time,
producing Tree-IL expressions directly.

Because this compiler is actually the macro expander, it is extensible.
Any macro which the user writes becomes part of the compiler.

The Scheme-to-Tree-IL expander may be invoked using the generic
@code{compile} procedure:

@lisp
(compile '(+ 1 2) #:from 'scheme #:to 'tree-il)
@result{}
#<tree-il (call (toplevel +) (const 1) (const 2))>
@end lisp

@code{(compile @var{foo} #:from 'scheme #:to 'tree-il)} is entirely
equivalent to calling the macro expander as @code{(macroexpand @var{foo}
'c '(compile load eval))}.  @xref{Macro Expansion}.
@code{compile-tree-il}, the procedure dispatched by @code{compile} to
@code{'tree-il}, is a small wrapper around @code{macroexpand}, to make
it conform to the general form of compiler procedures in Guile's
language tower.

Compiler procedures take three arguments: an expression, an
environment, and a keyword list of options. They return three values:
the compiled expression, the corresponding environment for the target
language, and a ``continuation environment''. The compiled expression
and environment will serve as input to the next language's compiler.
The ``continuation environment'' can be used to compile another
expression from the same source language within the same module.

For example, you might compile the expression, @code{(define-module
(foo))}. This will result in a Tree-IL expression and environment. But
if you compiled a second expression, you would want to take into
account the compile-time effect of compiling the previous expression,
which puts the user in the @code{(foo)} module. That is purpose of the
``continuation environment''; you would pass it as the environment
when compiling the subsequent expression.

For Scheme, an environment is a module. By default, the @code{compile}
and @code{compile-file} procedures compile in a fresh module, such
that bindings and macros introduced by the expression being compiled
are isolated:

@example
(eq? (current-module) (compile '(current-module)))
@result{} #f

(compile '(define hello 'world))
(defined? 'hello)
@result{} #f

(define / *)
(eq? (compile '/) /)
@result{} #f
@end example

Similarly, changes to the @code{current-reader} fluid (@pxref{Loading,
@code{current-reader}}) are isolated:

@example
(compile '(fluid-set! current-reader (lambda args 'fail)))
(fluid-ref current-reader)
@result{} #f
@end example

Nevertheless, having the compiler and @dfn{compilee} share the same name
space can be achieved by explicitly passing @code{(current-module)} as
the compilation environment:

@example
(define hello 'world)
(compile 'hello #:env (current-module))
@result{} world
@end example

@node Tree-IL
@subsection Tree-IL

Tree Intermediate Language (Tree-IL) is a structured intermediate
language that is close in expressive power to Scheme. It is an
expanded, pre-analyzed Scheme.

Tree-IL is ``structured'' in the sense that its representation is
based on records, not S-expressions. This gives a rigidity to the
language that ensures that compiling to a lower-level language only
requires a limited set of transformations. For example, the Tree-IL
type @code{<const>} is a record type with two fields, @code{src} and
@code{exp}. Instances of this type are created via @code{make-const}.
Fields of this type are accessed via the @code{const-src} and
@code{const-exp} procedures. There is also a predicate, @code{const?}.
@xref{Records}, for more information on records.

@c alpha renaming

All Tree-IL types have a @code{src} slot, which holds source location
information for the expression. This information, if present, will be
residualized into the compiled object code, allowing backtraces to
show source information. The format of @code{src} is the same as that
returned by Guile's @code{source-properties} function. @xref{Source
Properties}, for more information.

Although Tree-IL objects are represented internally using records,
there is also an equivalent S-expression external representation for
each kind of Tree-IL. For example, the S-expression representation
of @code{#<const src: #f exp: 3>} expression would be:

@example
(const 3)
@end example

Users may program with this format directly at the REPL:

@example
scheme@@(guile-user)> ,language tree-il
Happy hacking with Tree Intermediate Language!  To switch back, type `,L scheme'.
tree-il@@(guile-user)> (call (primitive +) (const 32) (const 10))
@result{} 42
@end example

The @code{src} fields are left out of the external representation.

One may create Tree-IL objects from their external representations via
calling @code{parse-tree-il}, the reader for Tree-IL. If any source
information is attached to the input S-expression, it will be
propagated to the resulting Tree-IL expressions. This is probably the
easiest way to compile to Tree-IL: just make the appropriate external
representations in S-expression format, and let @code{parse-tree-il}
take care of the rest.

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <void> src
@deftpx {External Representation} (void)
An empty expression.  In practice, equivalent to Scheme's @code{(if #f
#f)}.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <const> src exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (const @var{exp})
A constant.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <primitive-ref> src name
@deftpx {External Representation} (primitive @var{name})
A reference to a ``primitive''.  A primitive is a procedure that, when
compiled, may be open-coded.  For example, @code{cons} is usually
recognized as a primitive, so that it compiles down to a single
instruction.

Compilation of Tree-IL usually begins with a pass that resolves some
@code{<module-ref>} and @code{<toplevel-ref>} expressions to
@code{<primitive-ref>} expressions.  The actual compilation pass has
special cases for calls to certain primitives, like @code{apply} or
@code{cons}.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <lexical-ref> src name gensym
@deftpx {External Representation} (lexical @var{name} @var{gensym})
A reference to a lexically-bound variable.  The @var{name} is the
original name of the variable in the source program. @var{gensym} is a
unique identifier for this variable.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <lexical-set> src name gensym exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (set! (lexical @var{name} @var{gensym}) @var{exp})
Sets a lexically-bound variable.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <module-ref> src mod name public?
@deftpx {External Representation} (@@ @var{mod} @var{name})
@deftpx {External Representation} (@@@@ @var{mod} @var{name})
A reference to a variable in a specific module. @var{mod} should be
the name of the module, e.g.@: @code{(guile-user)}.

If @var{public?} is true, the variable named @var{name} will be looked
up in @var{mod}'s public interface, and serialized with @code{@@};
otherwise it will be looked up among the module's private bindings,
and is serialized with @code{@@@@}.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <module-set> src mod name public? exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (set! (@@ @var{mod} @var{name}) @var{exp})
@deftpx {External Representation} (set! (@@@@ @var{mod} @var{name}) @var{exp})
Sets a variable in a specific module.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <toplevel-ref> src name
@deftpx {External Representation} (toplevel @var{name})
References a variable from the current procedure's module.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <toplevel-set> src name exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (set! (toplevel @var{name}) @var{exp})
Sets a variable in the current procedure's module.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <toplevel-define> src name exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (define (toplevel @var{name}) @var{exp})
Defines a new top-level variable in the current procedure's module.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <conditional> src test then else
@deftpx {External Representation} (if @var{test} @var{then} @var{else})
A conditional. Note that @var{else} is not optional.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <call> src proc args
@deftpx {External Representation} (call @var{proc} . @var{args})
A procedure call.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <primcall> src name args
@deftpx {External Representation} (primcall @var{name} . @var{args})
A call to a primitive.  Equivalent to @code{(call (primitive @var{name})
. @var{args})}.  This construct is often more convenient to generate and
analyze than @code{<call>}.

As part of the compilation process, instances of @code{(call (primitive
@var{name}) . @var{args})} are transformed into primcalls.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <seq> src head tail
@deftpx {External Representation} (seq @var{head} @var{tail})
A sequence.  The semantics is that @var{head} is evaluated first, and
any resulting values are ignored.  Then @var{tail} is evaluated, in tail
position.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <lambda> src meta body
@deftpx {External Representation} (lambda @var{meta} @var{body})
A closure.  @var{meta} is an association list of properties for the
procedure.  @var{body} is a single Tree-IL expression of type
@code{<lambda-case>}.  As the @code{<lambda-case>} clause can chain to
an alternate clause, this makes Tree-IL's @code{<lambda>} have the
expressiveness of Scheme's @code{case-lambda}.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <lambda-case> req opt rest kw inits gensyms body alternate
@deftpx {External Representation} @
  (lambda-case ((@var{req} @var{opt} @var{rest} @var{kw} @var{inits} @var{gensyms})@
                @var{body})@
               [@var{alternate}])
One clause of a @code{case-lambda}.  A @code{lambda} expression in
Scheme is treated as a @code{case-lambda} with one clause.

@var{req} is a list of the procedure's required arguments, as symbols.
@var{opt} is a list of the optional arguments, or @code{#f} if there
are no optional arguments. @var{rest} is the name of the rest
argument, or @code{#f}.

@var{kw} is a list of the form, @code{(@var{allow-other-keys?}
(@var{keyword} @var{name} @var{var}) ...)}, where @var{keyword} is the
keyword corresponding to the argument named @var{name}, and whose
corresponding gensym is @var{var}.  @var{inits} are tree-il expressions
corresponding to all of the optional and keyword arguments, evaluated to
bind variables whose value is not supplied by the procedure caller.
Each @var{init} expression is evaluated in the lexical context of
previously bound variables, from left to right.

@var{gensyms} is a list of gensyms corresponding to all arguments:
first all of the required arguments, then the optional arguments if
any, then the rest argument if any, then all of the keyword arguments.

@var{body} is the body of the clause.  If the procedure is called with
an appropriate number of arguments, @var{body} is evaluated in tail
position.  Otherwise, if there is an @var{alternate}, it should be a
@code{<lambda-case>} expression, representing the next clause to try.
If there is no @var{alternate}, a wrong-number-of-arguments error is
signaled.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <let> src names gensyms vals exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (let @var{names} @var{gensyms} @var{vals} @var{exp})
Lexical binding, like Scheme's @code{let}.  @var{names} are the original
binding names, @var{gensyms} are gensyms corresponding to the
@var{names}, and @var{vals} are Tree-IL expressions for the values.
@var{exp} is a single Tree-IL expression.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <letrec> in-order? src names gensyms vals exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (letrec @var{names} @var{gensyms} @var{vals} @var{exp})
@deftpx {External Representation} (letrec* @var{names} @var{gensyms} @var{vals} @var{exp})
A version of @code{<let>} that creates recursive bindings, like
Scheme's @code{letrec}, or @code{letrec*} if @var{in-order?} is true.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <prompt> escape-only? tag body handler
@deftpx {External Representation} (prompt @var{escape-only?} @var{tag} @var{body} @var{handler})
A dynamic prompt.  Instates a prompt named @var{tag}, an expression,
during the dynamic extent of the execution of @var{body}, also an
expression.  If an abort occurs to this prompt, control will be passed
to @var{handler}, also an expression, which should be a procedure.  The
first argument to the handler procedure will be the captured
continuation, followed by all of the values passed to the abort.  If
@var{escape-only?} is true, the handler should be a @code{<lambda>} with
a single @code{<lambda-case>} body expression with no optional or
keyword arguments, and no alternate, and whose first argument is
unreferenced.  @xref{Prompts}, for more information.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <abort> tag args tail
@deftpx {External Representation} (abort @var{tag} @var{args} @var{tail})
An abort to the nearest prompt with the name @var{tag}, an expression.
@var{args} should be a list of expressions to pass to the prompt's
handler, and @var{tail} should be an expression that will evaluate to
a list of additional arguments.  An abort will save the partial
continuation, which may later be reinstated, resulting in the
@code{<abort>} expression evaluating to some number of values.
@end deftp

There are two Tree-IL constructs that are not normally produced by
higher-level compilers, but instead are generated during the
source-to-source optimization and analysis passes that the Tree-IL
compiler does.  Users should not generate these expressions directly,
unless they feel very clever, as the default analysis pass will generate
them as necessary.

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <let-values> src names gensyms exp body
@deftpx {External Representation} (let-values @var{names} @var{gensyms} @var{exp} @var{body})
Like Scheme's @code{receive} -- binds the values returned by
evaluating @code{exp} to the @code{lambda}-like bindings described by
@var{gensyms}.  That is to say, @var{gensyms} may be an improper list.

@code{<let-values>} is an optimization of a @code{<call>} to the
primitive, @code{call-with-values}.
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <fix> src names gensyms vals body
@deftpx {External Representation} (fix @var{names} @var{gensyms} @var{vals} @var{body})
Like @code{<letrec>}, but only for @var{vals} that are unset
@code{lambda} expressions.

@code{fix} is an optimization of @code{letrec} (and @code{let}).
@end deftp

Tree-IL is a convenient compilation target from source languages.  It
can be convenient as a medium for optimization, though CPS is usually
better.  The strength of Tree-IL is that it does not fix order of
evaluation, so it makes some code motion a bit easier.

Optimization passes performed on Tree-IL currently include:

@itemize
@item Open-coding (turning toplevel-refs into primitive-refs,
and calls to primitives to primcalls)
@item Partial evaluation (comprising inlining, copy propagation, and
constant folding)
@item Common subexpression elimination (CSE)
@end itemize

In the future, we will move the CSE pass to operate over the lower-level
CPS language.

@node Continuation-Passing Style
@subsection Continuation-Passing Style

@cindex CPS
Continuation-passing style (CPS) is Guile's principal intermediate
language, bridging the gap between languages for people and languages
for machines.  CPS gives a name to every part of a program: every
control point, and every intermediate value.  This makes it an excellent
medium for reasoning about programs, which is the principal job of a
compiler.

@menu
* An Introduction to CPS::
* CPS in Guile::
* Compiling CPS::
@end menu

@node An Introduction to CPS
@subsubsection An Introduction to CPS

As an example, consider the following Scheme expression:

@lisp
(begin
  (display "The sum of 32 and 10 is: ")
  (display 42)
  (newline))
@end lisp

Let us identify all of the sub-expressions in this expression.  We give
them unique labels, like @var{k1}, and annotate the original source
code:

@lisp
(begin
  (display "The sum of 32 and 10 is: ")
  |k1      k2
  k0
  (display 42)
  |k4      k5
  k3
  (newline))
  |k7
  k6
@end lisp

These labels also identify continuations.  For example, the continuation
of @code{k7} is @code{k6}.  This is because after evaluating the value
of @code{newline}, performed by the expression labelled @code{k7}, we
continue to apply it in @var{k6}.

Which label has @code{k0} as its continuation?  It is either @code{k1}
or @code{k2}.  Scheme does not have a fixed order of evaluation of
arguments, although it does guarantee that they are evaluated in some
order.  However, continuation-passing style makes evaluation order
explicit.  In Guile, this choice is made by the higher-level language
compilers.

Let us assume a left-to-right evaluation order.  In that case the
continuation of @code{k1} is @code{k2}, and the continuation of
@code{k2} is @code{k0}.

With this example established, we are ready to give an example of CPS in
Scheme:

@lisp
(lambda (ktail)
  (let ((k1 (lambda ()
              (let ((k2 (lambda (proc)
                          (let ((k0 (lambda (arg0)
                                      (proc k4 arg0))))
                            (k0 "The sum of 32 and 10 is: ")))))
                (k2 display))))
        (k4 (lambda _
              (let ((k5 (lambda (proc)
                          (let ((k3 (lambda (arg0)
                                      (proc k7 arg0))))
                            (k3 42)))))
                (k5 display))))
        (k7 (lambda _
              (let ((k6 (lambda (proc)
                          (proc ktail))))
                (k6 newline)))))
    (k1))
@end lisp

Holy code explosion, Batman!  What's with all the lambdas?  Indeed, CPS
is by nature much more verbose than ``direct-style'' intermediate
languages like Tree-IL.  At the same time, CPS is more simple than full
Scheme, in the same way that a Turing machine is more simple than
Scheme, although they are semantically equivalent.

In the original program, the expression labelled @code{k0} is in effect
context.  Any values it returns are ignored.  This is reflected in CPS
by noting that its continuation, @code{k4}, takes any number of values
and ignores them.  Compare this to @code{k2}, which takes a single
value; in this way we can say that @code{k1} is in a ``value'' context.
Likewise @code{k6} is in tail context with respect to the expression as
a whole, because its continuation is the tail continuation,
@code{ktail}.  CPS makes these details manifest, and gives them names.

@node CPS in Guile
@subsubsection CPS in Guile

Like Tree-IL, CPS is also a structured language, implemented with
records not S-expressions.

@deftp {Scheme Variable} <prompt> escape-only? tag body handler
@deftpx {External Representation} (prompt @var{escape-only?} @var{tag} @var{body} @var{handler})
@end deftp

@deftp {Scheme Variable} $arity req opt rest kw allow-other-keys?
@end deftp


@deftp {Scheme Variable} $letk conts body
@deftpx {External Representation} (letk @var{conts} @var{body})
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $continue k src exp
@deftpx {External Representation} (continue @var{k} @var{src} @var{exp})
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $letrec names syms funs body
@deftpx {External Representation} (letrec @var{names} @var{syms} @var{funs} @var{body})
@end deftp

;; Continuations
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $cont k cont
@deftpx {External Representation} (cont k cont)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $kif kt kf
@deftpx {External Representation} (kif kt kf)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $ktrunc arity k
@deftpx {External Representation} (ktrunc arity k)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $kargs names syms body
@deftpx {External Representation} (kargs names syms body)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $kentry self tail clauses
@deftpx {External Representation} (kentry self tail clauses)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $ktail
@deftpx {External Representation} (ktail)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $kclause arity cont
@deftpx {External Representation} (kclause arity cont)
@end deftp

;; Expressions.
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $void
@deftpx {External Representation} (void)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $const val
@deftpx {External Representation} (const val)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $prim name
@deftpx {External Representation} (prim name)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $fun src meta free body
@deftpx {External Representation} (fun src meta free body)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $call proc args
@deftpx {External Representation} (call proc args)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $primcall name args
@deftpx {External Representation} (primcall name args)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $values args
@deftpx {External Representation} (values args)
@end deftp
@deftp {Scheme Variable} $prompt escape? tag handler pop
@deftpx {External Representation} (prompt escape? tag handler pop)
@end deftp

;; Helper.
            $arity
            make-$arity

            ;; Terms.
            $letk $continue $letrec

            ;; Continuations.
            $cont

            ;; Continuation bodies.
            $kif $ktrunc $kargs $kentry $ktail $kclause

            ;; Expressions.
            $void $const $prim $fun $call $primcall $values $prompt

            ;; Building macros.
            let-gensyms
            build-cps-term build-cps-cont build-cps-exp
            rewrite-cps-term rewrite-cps-cont rewrite-cps-exp

            ;; Misc.
            parse-cps unparse-cps
            fold-conts fold-local-conts

cwcc

records, unlike early cps (rabbit, orbit)

@node Compiling CPS
@subsubsection Compiling CPS

In CPS, there are no nested expressions.  Indeed, CPS even removes the
concept of a stack.  All applications in CPS are in tail context.  For
that reason, applications in CPS are jumps, not calls.  The @code{(k1)}
above is nothing more than a @code{goto}.  @code{(k3 42)} is a
@code{goto} with a value.  In this way, CPS bridges the gap between the
lambda calculus and machine instruction sequences.

On the side of machine instructions, Guile does still have a stack, and
the @code{lambda} forms shown above do not actually result in one
closure being allocated per subexpression at run-time.  Lambda
expressions introduced by a CPS transformation can always be allocated
as labels or basic blocks within a function.  In fact, we make a
syntactic distinction between closures and continuations in the CPS
language, and attempt to transform closures to continuations (basic
blocks) where possible, via the @dfn{contification} optimization pass.

Values bound by continuations are allocated to stack slots in a
function's frame.  The compiler from CPS only allocates slots to values
that are actually live; it's possible to have a value in scope but not
allocated to a slot.


@node Bytecode
@subsection Bytecode

Blah blah ...

@xref{Object File Format}

(system vm loader)

@deffn {Scheme Variable} load-thunk-from-file file
@deffnx {C Function} scm_load_thunk_from_file (file)
Load object code from a file named @var{file}. The file will be mapped
into memory via @code{mmap}, so this is a very fast operation.

On disk, object code is embedded in ELF, a flexible container format
created for use in UNIX systems.  Guile has its own ELF linker and
loader, so it uses the ELF format on all systems.
@end deffn

likewise load-thunk-from-memory

Compiling object code to the fake language, @code{value}, is performed
via loading objcode into a program, then executing that thunk with
respect to the compilation environment. Normally the environment
propagates through the compiler transparently, but users may specify
the compilation environment manually as well, as a module.


@node Writing New High-Level Languages
@subsection Writing New High-Level Languages

In order to integrate a new language @var{lang} into Guile's compiler
system, one has to create the module @code{(language @var{lang} spec)}
containing the language definition and referencing the parser,
compiler and other routines processing it. The module hierarchy in
@code{(language brainfuck)} defines a very basic Brainfuck
implementation meant to serve as easy-to-understand example on how to
do this. See for instance @url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck}
for more information about the Brainfuck language itself.


@node Extending the Compiler
@subsection Extending the Compiler

At this point we take a detour from the impersonal tone of the rest of
the manual.  Admit it: if you've read this far into the compiler
internals manual, you are a junkie.  Perhaps a course at your university
left you unsated, or perhaps you've always harbored a desire to hack the
holy of computer science holies: a compiler.  Well you're in good
company, and in a good position.  Guile's compiler needs your help.

There are many possible avenues for improving Guile's compiler.
Probably the most important improvement, speed-wise, will be some form
of native compilation, both just-in-time and ahead-of-time. This could
be done in many ways. Probably the easiest strategy would be to extend
the compiled procedure structure to include a pointer to a native code
vector, and compile from bytecode to native code at run-time after a
procedure is called a certain number of times.

The name of the game is a profiling-based harvest of the low-hanging
fruit, running programs of interest under a system-level profiler and
determining which improvements would give the most bang for the buck.
It's really getting to the point though that native compilation is the
next step.

The compiler also needs help at the top end, enhancing the Scheme that
it knows to also understand R6RS, and adding new high-level compilers.
We have JavaScript and Emacs Lisp mostly complete, but they could use
some love; Lua would be nice as well, but whatever language it is
that strikes your fancy would be welcome too.

Compilers are for hacking, not for admiring or for complaining about.
Get to it!