Programming Languages

998 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 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months 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 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)

Sorry, I meant a general language rather than one that is described as a "hardware description language". I went ahead and edited the post to be more clear about that.

Thanks for the info though as others might still be interested in it!

[–] Tubbles 7 points 8 months ago (5 children)

The most low level languages, such as C, compiles down to CPU instructions, which still is way above logic gates. The CPU in turn reads the instructions and controls the computer to in a way "simulate" what could be described as a boolean expression -- at every CPU clock cycle. The next cycle the permutation of all control signals and computer compinents will be different. I highly doubt any programming language implementation has an IR that resembles what you are looking for, including mathematica. The closest you get is probably HDLs but then you need to do all the mathing yourself

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 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

[–] Tubbles 1 points 8 months 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 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months 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.

load more comments (2 replies)