Programming Languages

1167 readers

1 users here now

Hello!

This is the current Lemmy equivalent of https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/.

The content and rules are the same here as they are over there. Taken directly from the /r/ProgrammingLanguages overview:

This community is dedicated to the theory, design and implementation of programming languages.

Be nice to each other. Flame wars and rants are not welcomed. Please also put some effort into your post.

This isn't the right place to ask questions such as "What language should I use for X", "what language should I learn", and "what's your favorite language". Such questions should be posted in /c/learn_programming or /c/programming.

This is the right place for posts like the following:

"Check out this new language I've been working on!"
"Here's a blog post on how I implemented static type checking into this compiler"
"I want to write a compiler, where do I start?"
"How does the Java compiler work? How does it handle forward declarations/imports/targeting multiple platforms/?"
"How should I test my compiler? How are other compilers and interpreters like gcc, Java, and python tested?"
"What are the pros/cons of ?"
"Compare and contrast vs. "
"Confused about the semantics of this language"
"Proceedings from PLDI / OOPSLA / ICFP / "

See /r/ProgrammingLanguages for specific examples

Related online communities

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Compiling To Logic Gates (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

TLDR; do you know of any general purpose languages that can also compile a function to some representation of AND/OR gates (or NAND gates, or whatever)?

Edit: actually any algebra/formal-logical system is also fine (not just boolean algebra).

Yes, a A LOT of additional info is needed, like defining how input/output is defined, and I am interested in how those would be specified. I'm not interested in printing an actual circuit, just the boolean-logic level. And I'm mostly asking because I feel like most compilers can't generate a clean/mathematical representation from their AST. There's AST to IR, there's hard-coded optimizations on the IR, and then there's hard-coded mappings from the IR to assembly, but at no point (AFAIK) is the code turned into a algebraic/logical system where something like De Morgan's Law can be applied. And that seems really sad to me.

So you could say my real question is: what compilers have a strong logical/algebraic internal representation of their own AST?

Maybe something like Haskell or Prolog do this. The Wolfram Language almost certainly does but it's closed source.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

And with so much stuff being built ontop of C (or at minimum LLVM) I was afraid that would be the case.

I was kinda hoping there would be some hacky compiler that could take a C function like:

short doStuff(short a, short b) {
     short c = a * b;
     short d = c + a; 
     return d;
}

/* A more realistic example would be something like AES/DES/DEA  */

Create boolean inputs for the bits in a and b, and an boolean outputs for c
Have mappings/templates for converting multiply and add into boolean logic expressions
Simplify/compress/optimize the expressions
Print out some kind of expression or maybe graph representation of the logic gates and connections

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can highly recommend you have a look at some HDL languages, eg Verilog can look roughly like your example and synthesizes down to logic elements

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Cool I'll give them I shot! I'll admit I haven't heard great things about typical HDL langs, so I haven't looked into them much

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Another way could be to run that through a compiler with optimization activated, and then decompile the resulting binary back to code. But if you want to optimize hot code then usually mathematical reduction is seldomly wherein the problem lies

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't know about math reduction not being the bottle neck. If I was custom optimizing hot code then yeah, cache hit optimization is huge, but I'm thinking of generic optimizations on hot code that only the compiler looks at. Beyond out-of-order-execution and SIMD kind of algebraic shuffling. For example, I want to be confident that the compiler would transform something like

for each in range(x) x += x

into x*=x+1

And based on stuff like this (which is shockingly recent IMO) I don't think modern compilers can even find that shortcut right now. Which is kinda sad when you think about it.

If x=65536, any non-algebraic optimizaiton would be vastly inferior. And sure an experienced dev wouldn't make this kind of mistake, but I bet half the code running on the average computer wasnt written by experienced devs. And its not like its an either-or situation, we can do both optimization steps.