I enjoy your videos but please for the love of God, fix your audio static problem, it's hard to hear when the audio stream is is poor. Also please hand a microphone 🎤 to the people who ask questions, I can barely hear them, thanks for Chandler for repeating their questions I can understand what they asked. Invest in audio quality and extra microphone for the audience.
@@samanthaqiu3416 [he redpilled me on the insanity of the GNU GCC/G++ tightly coupled design based entirely on political principles] Where i can read about all this?
I'm in the middle of the talk and it dawns on me. The token in the lexer is basically a tuple of (id, line-number) where the id is the index into the ECS arrays. ECS being the Entiy-Component-System from the game industry. Nice to adopt ideas from the game development.
Actually you are correct the token is either a single character or a group of characters or words without whitespace or spaces between them. A Lexer token will catch the following as tokens in the loop as single characters: In a Lexer they catch: a, z, 0, 9, (, ), {, }, [, ], +, -, *. etc. In the Parser they catch: KEYWORD, LPAREN, RPAREN, myvar, EQUAL, 100, MINUS, 42, MULT, 5, DIV, 2, ADD, 45.332, NEWLINE, x1, EQUAL, DQUOTE I am a sentence, DQUOTE, etc. State Switches, counters and Temporary Variables which are variables as Integers, incrementing and string storage set precedence's conditionally and catch tokens at each iteration in the loop. Struct's as tuples are used to store what your asking as line number, value and id etc. Temporary Variables pass these values into the structs and do so in the loop when specific conditions are met and if errors occur. These structs as Tuples can easily be stored into Log or data files at the end of the process when flags are set in your program also. And for faster processes can re load these struct files as cache files.
Awesome talk! This idea of "semantic IR" is also used by Zig to do type analysis and compile time execution together in a single pass. It does indeed limit type inference though, as you can't use future usages to determine the type of a variable declaration.
Interesting talk on making compilers faster by adopting data-oriented design instead of the usual way of writing lexers and parsers, replacing the incrementally-allocated token and AST structures with faster array-based structures. Unfortunately the number of questions breaks the flow. It seems some of the audience members wanted everyone to know every thought that popped into their heads.
Funnily enough I took a stab at parsing a baby typescript fast, and ended up with a vaguely similar structure, including a semantic tree as a basic block IR. I stalled out when I realized I'd have to actually figure out analysis 😅 Definitely some neat ideas like postorder parse tree.
Interestingly, Chris Lattner himself said in a recent llvm talk that he wished he had put a c++ - specific IR into clang, and that pretty much all other llvm-supported languages do. Also, great talk.
I'm interested in compiler design that supports both IDE (LSP, IntelliJ, etc.) and compiler/interpreter models as there is a lot of shared infrastructure in the lexing, parsing, and semantic analysis side of things. Advanced IDE features like optimization hints, interactive debugging, code completion, parameter hints, semantic highlighting, etc. are all blurring the line between an IDE tool and a full compiler/interpreter. There are also challenges in defining how the compiler/interpreter models the program and how the IDE (LSP, or custom APIs like in IntelliJ) that make it challenging to define an abstract lexer/parser that works in all 3+ environments (command line, LSP/VSCode, IntelliJ or other IDE-specific API).
47:50 What's that typeface? It's exactly what I have always been looking for! Sharp, clean, yet tall like the old VGA screen fonts from when I was a kid.
On at least a few big C++ codebases where I have measured, it's easily in the ballpark of 70% - 80% time in the frontend for a development or debug build.
@@ChandlerCarruth pleaseplease tell me you at least touch the subject of incremental/differential parsing? When the programmer inserts a new character, it's terribly wasteful to parse the entire file from the start
32-bit index is a handle to the token. Can then use that to look up the details of the token, including a byte offset into the source file and the spelling of the token within the source file.
24:28 This seems pretty insane to me because on my high end desktop 10 million lines of code takes over a second just for `wc` to count the number of words.
1:01:04 what’s the name of the person and code that the guy shouts out this point in the vid? “You do know your reinventing ?? or V-Code>??, right?” And “this is how Nicholas ???? Compilers all work?”
Very cool talk but it is a shame that the questions are not repeated as it is very hard to hear the audience. They sound like very interesting questions.
There are many parts in this how i approach my toy-language compiler: But interestingly I came from direction from forth to a similar stack machine for syntax tree parsing instead of kind of inventing it downwards from traditional parsers not being good for data oriented design. But some of the techniques seems very close actually... oh... and also the lexer to do parentheses-like checking and error messages too... makes much more sense than the parser doing this. EDIT> Yes, "semantics as IR" is very possible and my approach too, just I call it differently and do it much more text-based than IR in that sense its not a bytecode. Also makes its much easier to develop your compiler, better understand what the various steps do, what the optimizer step do etc. etc.... and the optimization and semantics as IR can be represented as same representations - they not need to be different at all. Actually did not expect carbon compiler design having this cool ideas so might end up a good language in the end. But I think this talk is beneficial to any kind of compiler design practically...
@@sumofat4994 are you serious? Check your facts please, because Chandler is known in the compilers industry way even before Andrew worked in zig and Jon on jai. In fact they both watch his talks and started incorporating some of his ideas. Jon mentioned him multiple times on his streams.
Interesting and well presented, but questions should have been kept to the end. They are inaudible anyway in this video, as well as breaking up the flow badly. Some if the ideas are quite old, such as using a custom stack actually allocated on the heap to avoid running out of stack space when parsing data with a nested structure. I was doing that in the 90s when implementing a web browser on a PDA.
I see it's getting discussed later on, but when I started watching, my first thought was that numbers ~25:00 would have more sense when shown as 0.1 of sec, so 1m, 100k and 10k respectively, or even better, I think many people are used to 60 fps rendering, so it'd be even better posed as: how much code can you cover in 16ms and that would be respectively: 167k loc, 16k loc, 1.6k loc
Instead of struct A {int a; int b;}; std::vector. One does struct B {std::vector a_values; std::vector b_values;}; The benefit is 1) no wasted space due to alignment. And 2) if a function only needs a, only those are loaded into cache. So it is more space efficient and more performant.
Array of Struct: {a: int, b: float}[] Struct of array: {a: int[], b: float[]} The second is more cache friendly if you read 'a' ten times more often than 'b'
Questions, questions more questions. A sign of an ill-prepared talk if ever there was one. I will be happy when c++ community focuses on the actual language instead of these 'safe' extensions. Yes, Herb, looking at you, too.
interesting, but seriously: the syntax sucks and it's just another imperative language, with no real concept of memory safety. I don't like Rust either, but at least it has a certain right to exist with affine types and borrowing...
Missed opportunity to say "keep the carbon footprint to a minimum" in the beginning
🎉
You'll learn a lot from Chandler's talks. Great one again.
Thank you for your positive comments!
I enjoy your videos but please for the love of God, fix your audio static problem, it's hard to hear when the audio stream is is poor.
Also please hand a microphone 🎤 to the people who ask questions, I can barely hear them, thanks for Chandler for repeating their questions I can understand what they asked.
Invest in audio quality and extra microphone for the audience.
I don't know much about the inner workings of compilers, but the little I do know I learnt from Chandler Carruth.
Always good to hear from Chandler, the one of the few folks on the conference with connection to reality.
he redpilled me on the insanity of the GNU GCC/G++ tightly coupled design based entirely on political principles
@@samanthaqiu3416 where I can read(or see) more about this topic? I assume he wrote or talk about it
@@samanthaqiu3416
[he redpilled me on the insanity of the GNU GCC/G++ tightly coupled design based entirely on political principles]
Where i can read about all this?
I'm in the middle of the talk and it dawns on me. The token in the lexer is basically a tuple of (id, line-number) where the id is the index into the ECS arrays. ECS being the Entiy-Component-System from the game industry. Nice to adopt ideas from the game development.
Actually you are correct the token is either a single character or a group of characters or words without whitespace or spaces between them. A Lexer token will catch the following as tokens in the loop as single characters:
In a Lexer they catch:
a, z, 0, 9, (, ), {, }, [, ], +, -, *. etc.
In the Parser they catch:
KEYWORD, LPAREN, RPAREN, myvar, EQUAL, 100, MINUS, 42, MULT, 5, DIV, 2, ADD, 45.332, NEWLINE, x1, EQUAL, DQUOTE I am a sentence, DQUOTE, etc.
State Switches, counters and Temporary Variables which are variables as Integers, incrementing and string storage set precedence's conditionally and catch tokens at each iteration in the loop.
Struct's as tuples are used to store what your asking as line number, value and id etc. Temporary Variables pass these values into the structs and do so in the loop when specific conditions are met and if errors occur.
These structs as Tuples can easily be stored into Log or data files at the end of the process when flags are set in your program also. And for faster processes can re load these struct files as cache files.
I really enjoy Chandler's talks
He's a very bright man!
Awesome talk! This idea of "semantic IR" is also used by Zig to do type analysis and compile time execution together in a single pass. It does indeed limit type inference though, as you can't use future usages to determine the type of a variable declaration.
Interesting talk on making compilers faster by adopting data-oriented design instead of the usual way of writing lexers and parsers, replacing the incrementally-allocated token and AST structures with faster array-based structures. Unfortunately the number of questions breaks the flow. It seems some of the audience members wanted everyone to know every thought that popped into their heads.
Thats also a great deal for a compiler that just changes a part in a huge code base and makes your changes linkable.
this was a very curious audience. Love it
Very entertaining 👏
Funnily enough I took a stab at parsing a baby typescript fast, and ended up with a vaguely similar structure, including a semantic tree as a basic block IR. I stalled out when I realized I'd have to actually figure out analysis 😅
Definitely some neat ideas like postorder parse tree.
great talk!
repeating the questions would gone a long way here
Great talk, but kinda painful with all the interruptions from the "shadow" gallery.
Interestingly, Chris Lattner himself said in a recent llvm talk that he wished he had put a c++ - specific IR into clang, and that pretty much all other llvm-supported languages do.
Also, great talk.
the flashes of audio static made this really hard to watch towards the end
One should also look at how Zig does it since they also have a data-oriented approach for their compiler which lead to a very fast compile time.
I'm interested in compiler design that supports both IDE (LSP, IntelliJ, etc.) and compiler/interpreter models as there is a lot of shared infrastructure in the lexing, parsing, and semantic analysis side of things. Advanced IDE features like optimization hints, interactive debugging, code completion, parameter hints, semantic highlighting, etc. are all blurring the line between an IDE tool and a full compiler/interpreter.
There are also challenges in defining how the compiler/interpreter models the program and how the IDE (LSP, or custom APIs like in IntelliJ) that make it challenging to define an abstract lexer/parser that works in all 3+ environments (command line, LSP/VSCode, IntelliJ or other IDE-specific API).
You mean like borland's turbo pascal?
18:18 Shouldn't switch to full screen slide view, since the speaker is talking about something barely related, in response to a question.
47:50 What's that typeface? It's exactly what I have always been looking for! Sharp, clean, yet tall like the old VGA screen fonts from when I was a kid.
If you are talking about the VS Code font, it is JetBrains Mono.
Looks like Iosevka
Looks similar to Iosevka
It's Iosevka, I'm a big fan.
Well looks like I did not know what I was talking about. Now that I looked at it again it definitly does not look like JetBrains Mono.
What's font style and colour scheme in vs code,??? 48:34
Interesting ideas for compiler frontend design! I do however wonder how much time is spend in the frontend vs. optimization passes in the backend
On at least a few big C++ codebases where I have measured, it's easily in the ballpark of 70% - 80% time in the frontend for a development or debug build.
@@ChandlerCarruth pleaseplease tell me you at least touch the subject of incremental/differential parsing? When the programmer inserts a new character, it's terribly wasteful to parse the entire file from the start
@@GeorgeTsiros a file is always recompiled when you touch a new character. different code files which aren't touched tough may be incremental compiled
Wake up, honey! There's a new Chandler talk!
How does the merging of code locations and token kinds into a single 32 bit value work? Is it x bits for token kind and x bits for character index?
32-bit index is a handle to the token. Can then use that to look up the details of the token, including a byte offset into the source file and the spelling of the token within the source file.
cool talk
24:28 This seems pretty insane to me because on my high end desktop 10 million lines of code takes over a second just for `wc` to count the number of words.
1:01:04 what’s the name of the person and code that the guy shouts out this point in the vid? “You do know your reinventing ?? or V-Code>??, right?” And “this is how Nicholas ???? Compilers all work?”
I think it’s “P-code” produced by the Pascal compiler and “Niklaus Wirth”
Very cool talk but it is a shame that the questions are not repeated as it is very hard to hear the audience. They sound like very interesting questions.
niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiceeeeeee
There are many parts in this how i approach my toy-language compiler: But interestingly I came from direction from forth to a similar stack machine for syntax tree parsing instead of kind of inventing it downwards from traditional parsers not being good for data oriented design. But some of the techniques seems very close actually... oh... and also the lexer to do parentheses-like checking and error messages too... makes much more sense than the parser doing this.
EDIT> Yes, "semantics as IR" is very possible and my approach too, just I call it differently and do it much more text-based than IR in that sense its not a bytecode. Also makes its much easier to develop your compiler, better understand what the various steps do, what the optimizer step do etc. etc.... and the optimization and semantics as IR can be represented as same representations - they not need to be different at all.
Actually did not expect carbon compiler design having this cool ideas so might end up a good language in the end. But I think this talk is beneficial to any kind of compiler design practically...
Reminds me a lot about what Zig & Jai tries to do.
Have done. Amazing that now everyone wants to join the party when they realise they are slow af.
@@sumofat4994 are you serious? Check your facts please, because Chandler is known in the compilers industry way even before Andrew worked in zig and Jon on jai. In fact they both watch his talks and started incorporating some of his ideas. Jon mentioned him multiple times on his streams.
Interesting and well presented, but questions should have been kept to the end. They are inaudible anyway in this video, as well as breaking up the flow badly.
Some if the ideas are quite old, such as using a custom stack actually allocated on the heap to avoid running out of stack space when parsing data with a nested structure. I was doing that in the 90s when implementing a web browser on a PDA.
There was a special mic that AV folks and organizers thought would capture the audience questions so they were audible. =[
i can hear the questions with headphones on, fwiw
I see it's getting discussed later on, but when I started watching, my first thought was that numbers ~25:00 would have more sense when shown as 0.1 of sec, so 1m, 100k and 10k respectively,
or even better, I think many people are used to 60 fps rendering, so it'd be even better posed as: how much code can you cover in 16ms and that would be respectively: 167k loc, 16k loc, 1.6k loc
Can someone explain what's struct of arrays?
Instead of struct A {int a; int b;}; std::vector. One does struct B {std::vector a_values; std::vector b_values;}; The benefit is 1) no wasted space due to alignment. And 2) if a function only needs a, only those are loaded into cache. So it is more space efficient and more performant.
Array of Struct: {a: int, b: float}[]
Struct of array: {a: int[], b: float[]}
The second is more cache friendly if you read 'a' ten times more often than 'b'
Instead of accessing array[index].field you have fields in separate arrays, e.g. field[index]
1:01:11 whos compiler?
niklaus wirth
Shut up and let him present!
Questions, questions more questions. A sign of an ill-prepared talk if ever there was one. I will be happy when c++ community focuses on the actual language instead of these 'safe' extensions. Yes, Herb, looking at you, too.
Chandler looks humbled after trying to make own langugage ;)
pretty annoying to assume that everybody comes from university. Im self taught and I can take a book and learn about compiler theory
interesting, but seriously: the syntax sucks and it's just another imperative language, with no real concept of memory safety. I don't like Rust either, but at least it has a certain right to exist with affine types and borrowing...