* [Caml-list] Dynamic types, casts, and rights amplification
@ 2001-07-03 20:49 Mark Seaborn
2001-07-11 7:52 ` Francois Pottier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mark Seaborn @ 2001-07-03 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
Here's a nice use of OCaml's casts to provide what can be viewed as an
open dynamic type (except that variant tags -- called brands here --
are created at run time).
(* Should obey these axioms:
unpack b (pack b x) = Some x
unpack b1 (pack b2 x) = None provided b1 != b2
unpack b null = None
(ie. for the last one, the brand for null is closely-held)
and lastly:
make_brand() != make_brand()
NB. The equality used here is behavioural equality (which
is undecidable) rather than OCaml's `=' or `=='.
*)
(* I was going to have:
make_brand : 'a -> 'a brand
where the argument is an example value which is ignored.
But this isn't really necessary, and it could be awkward. *)
module type Dyn = sig
type 'a brand
type t
val make_brand : unit -> 'a brand
val pack : 'a brand -> 'a -> t
val unpack : 'a brand -> t -> 'a option
val null : t
end
module Dyn : Dyn = struct
(* Don't care about this type; it is cast to and from,
the equivalent of C's void*. *)
type any = int
type 'a brand = Stamp.t
type t = Stamp.t * any
let make_brand() = Stamp.make()
let pack brand value = (brand, Obj.magic value)
let unpack brand1 (brand2, value) =
if Stamp.eq brand1 brand2 then Some (Obj.magic value) else None
let null = pack (make_brand()) ()
end
using this module:
module type Stamp = sig
type t
val make : unit -> t
val eq : t -> t -> bool
end
module Stamp : Stamp = struct
type t = unit ref
let make() = ref()
let eq s1 s2 = s1 == s2
end
and here's a utility built with the Dyn module:
(* Should obey these axioms:
unpack (pack x) = x
unpack (pack2 b s x) = x
amplify b (pack x) = None
amplify b (pack2 b s x) = Some s
amplify b1 (pack2 b2 s x) = None provided b1 != b2
Note that
pack x = pack2 b s x
where b is closely-held, ie. not available to anyone.
The last axiom is simply the generativity of make_brand:
make_brand() != make_brand()
NB. The equality used here is behavioural equality (which
is undecidable) rather than OCaml's `=' or `=='.
*)
module type RightsAmp = sig
type 'a t
type 'a brand
val make_brand : unit -> 'a brand
val pack2 : 'b brand -> 'b -> 'a -> 'a t
val pack : 'a -> 'a t
val unpack : 'a t -> 'a
val amplify : 'b brand -> 'a t -> 'b option
end
module RightsAmp : RightsAmp = struct
type 'a brand = 'a Dyn.brand
type 'a t = 'a * Dyn.t
let make_brand = Dyn.make_brand
let pack2 brand secret value = (value, Dyn.pack brand secret)
let pack value = (value, Dyn.null)
let unpack (value, _) = value
let amplify brand (_, x) = Dyn.unpack brand x
end
I believe it's type sound, because it's not possible to create
polymorphic brands by the same restriction that prevents reference
values from being used polymorphically (the fact that this worked was
rather neat, I thought). However, if OCaml changed its tagged data
representation, casting could probably no longer be used this way (is
that likely to happen?). I think it should be possible to
alternatively implement this with brands as weak hash tables, and
Dyn.t as a unique stamp acting as a hash table key (though OCaml
doesn't provide weak hash tables, I think).
I found this particularly useful for getting around OCaml's
restrictions on circular dependencies between modules (in particular,
not being able to use a module parametrically in a cycle of
mutually-recursive types).
I used it to wrap up closures and allow the creator of closures to
recognise those closures it created and unpack hidden data from them
(or fall back to the default case for closures created by others) --
this is where the RightsAmp module comes in. It would have been
convenient if this layer of wrapping was not needed and closures could
be branded directly -- I imagine that the representation of closures
is fairly flexible, and this could be a more lightweight solution.
Brands would act a little like classes, except that the identity of a
class would act like a capability and need not be revealed.
I wonder, has anyone done this before? And if so, what phrases did
they use? (I have seen `brand' associated with rights amplification,
so I used that term.)
What is the chance of this going into the OCaml distribution?
ie. Would you want to commit yourself to providing this interface in
OCaml in the future?
--
Mark Seaborn
- mseaborn@bigfoot.com - http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~mrs35/ -
``Cambridge? Didn't that used to be a polytechnic?''
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] Dynamic types, casts, and rights amplification
2001-07-03 20:49 [Caml-list] Dynamic types, casts, and rights amplification Mark Seaborn
@ 2001-07-11 7:52 ` Francois Pottier
2001-07-11 10:13 ` Markus Mottl
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Francois Pottier @ 2001-07-11 7:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Seaborn; +Cc: caml-list, François Pottier
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1235 bytes --]
Mark,
> Here's a nice use of OCaml's casts to provide what can be viewed as an
> open dynamic type (except that variant tags -- called brands here --
> are created at run time).
There are ways of implementing such a dynamic type without using unsafe
type casts (i.e. Obj.magic). I have attached a file containing two sample
implementations.
The first one generates exceptions dynamically and uses them as tags. The
fact that they are exceptions is irrelevant; what matters is the ability to
generate new tags at runtime. Unfortunately, this piece of code isn't accepted
by O'Caml, because it doesn't recognize the type variable 'a in the exception
declaration as bound by the preceding type annotation.
The second one uses references as temporary buffers for data exchange. The
idea was posted a while ago on this mailing list, but I couldn't find the
exact reference. Instead of being tagged, a value is encoded within a function
whose effect is to write the value into a reference.
The second implementation is interesting, because it makes it easy to see why
one shouldn't create polymorphic brands: brands *are* references in this
approach.
--
François Pottier
Francois.Pottier@inria.fr
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~fpottier/
[-- Attachment #2: dyn.ml --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 796 bytes --]
module type Dyn = sig
type 'a brand
type t
val make_brand : unit -> 'a brand
val pack : 'a brand -> 'a -> t
val unpack : 'a brand -> t -> 'a option
val null : t
end
module Dyn : Dyn = struct
type 'a brand = ('a -> exn) * (exn -> 'a option)
type t = exn
let make_brand : unit -> 'a brand = function () ->
let module X = struct
exception E of 'a
let pack x = E x
let unpack = function
| E x -> Some x
| _ -> None
end in
X.pack, X.unpack
let pack = fst
let unpack = snd
exception Null
let null = Null
end
module Dyn : Dyn = struct
type 'a brand = ('a option) ref
type t = unit -> unit
let make_brand () =
ref None
let pack b x () =
b := Some x
let unpack b f =
b := None;
f();
!b
let null () =
()
end
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] Dynamic types, casts, and rights amplification
2001-07-11 7:52 ` Francois Pottier
@ 2001-07-11 10:13 ` Markus Mottl
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Markus Mottl @ 2001-07-11 10:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Francois Pottier; +Cc: caml-list
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Francois Pottier wrote:
> The first one generates exceptions dynamically and uses them as
> tags. The fact that they are exceptions is irrelevant; what matters
> is the ability to generate new tags at runtime. Unfortunately, this
> piece of code isn't accepted by O'Caml, because it doesn't recognize
> the type variable 'a in the exception declaration as bound by the
> preceding type annotation.
I also mentioned this limitation only a few days ago ("polymorphic"
exceptions - they are not really polymorphic, of course, but make use
of type variables bound elsewhere). Unfortunately, I didn't get any
response so far whether there are inherent difficulties in implementing
an extension. It wouldn't require any syntax change at all, won't break
old code, but clearly gives more expressiveness to the developer. Any
comments?
Regards,
Markus Mottl
--
Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at
Austrian Research Institute
for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-07-11 10:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-07-03 20:49 [Caml-list] Dynamic types, casts, and rights amplification Mark Seaborn
2001-07-11 7:52 ` Francois Pottier
2001-07-11 10:13 ` Markus Mottl
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox