Category Archives: Julia

#100DaysOfCode: Julia Edition

By: Fabian Becker

Re-posted from: https://geekmonkey.org/100daysofcode-julia-edition/

#100DaysOfCode: Julia Edition

If you've been on Twitter recently and have followed someone in tech, chances are you have encountered #100DaysOfCode mentioned at least once. I'm taking him up on the challenge and I'll be coding 100 days in Julia starting April 12th, 2021.

Backstory

100 Days of Code got started by Alex Kallaway who wanted to build a new habit and learn a new skill but found it difficult to stick to his goals after long days at work. He publicly committed himself to code at least one hour a day on 100 consecutive days. He identified a course on Free Code Camp as something he wanted to work through.

Rules

The original rules are as follows:

  • Code at least 1 hour per day for 100 consecutive days
  • Tweet about progress every day
  • Push code to Github every day
  • Time spent in tutorials, online courses does not count towards the time spent coding

These rules feel easy enough but are not very compatible with family life and work & life balance so I'm making two adjustments.

  • Take the weekends off
  • Code at least 45 minutes per day on 100 consecutive weekdays

This means my challenge will take me exactly 20 weeks and puts the end of the challenge to August 27th, 2021.

Goals

I want to approach this challenge with a purpose. When I was working on my PhD I inherited a project from previous members of my lab. It was an evolutionary algorithm workbench called EvA2 – a GUI application written in Java. EvA2 features over 50 different global, combinatorial and multi-objective optimization algorithms, a whole suite of test functions and tools to plot results and obtain statistics of your optimization runs.

#100DaysOfCode: Julia Edition
EvA2 – Evolutionary Algorithm Workbench

I'm currently in a phase where I want to reconnect to my research but do it in a more modern environment. Reactive notebooks with Pluto.jl, animated plots in Plots.jl and an existing community of ML researchers and scientific folks in the Julia community are enticing.

My goals will be as follows:

  • Build a small library of research problems for global and multi-objective optimization
  • Implement a state-of-the-art Differential Evolution optimizer
  • Implement a state-of-the-art Particle Swarm optimizer
  • Build interactive notebooks to visualise the inner workings of the above optimizers
  • (Optional) Dive into neural networks

It's not that those algorithms haven't been implemented in Julia, quite the contrary actually, with Optim.jl and Evolutionary.jl there already exist great optimization packages in the Julia ecosystem. However, it never hurts to explore your own ways and maybe, just maybe, find a better way that helps push the needle a littler further.

Partial Evaluation of a Pattern Matcher for E-graphs

By: Philip Zucker

Re-posted from: https:/www.philipzucker.com/staging-patterns/

Partial Evaluation is cool.

There are different interpretations of what partial evaluation means. I think the term can be applied to anything that you’re, well, partially evaluating. This might include really reaching down into and ripping apart the AST of a code block finding things like 1 + 7 and replacing them with 8.
However, my mental model of partial evaluation is a function that takes 2 arguments, one given at compile time and one at run time. Given the argument at compile time, you can hopefully do all sorts of decisions and control flow choices based off that information.
What I know of this, I’ve learned from reading Oleg Kiselyov http://okmij.org/ftp/meta-programming/index.html and his and other’s work in MetaOcaml. Sometimes this technique is called staged metaprogramming, or generative metaprogramming because you don’t really peek inside of Expr.

I wrote an implementation of a pattern matching in EGraphs that is slow. https://www.philipzucker.com/egraph-2/ I think partial evaluation in this style is a nice way to speed it up.

A useful pattern for organizing programming tasks is to build tiny programming languages (DSLs) and then write a function that takes a data structure containing a program written in this tiny language and interprets them over inputs. It is very often the case that the actual form of this program one is going to interpret is known at compile time.

A reasonable problem solving strategy is

  1. Try some maximally concrete examples and see what hand written code you would write
  2. Write an interpreter over some DSL describing the class of programs
  3. Stage the interpreter with quasiquotation, rearranging minimally as necessary.
  4. Check that your examples produce the same code or good enough compared to your hand written code.

So let’s start with 1.

Pattern matching feels a little scary, but when you actually sit down to do it on a concrete pattern, it ends up being a straightforward and boring pile of if-then-else clauses.

Here’s some straightforward examples of regular pattern matching

# pattern f(X)
function matchfx(e)
    if e isa Expr
        if e.head == :f and length(e.args) == 1
            return e.args[1]
        end
    end
end

# pattern f(X,Y)
function matchfxy(e)
    if e isa Expr
        if e.head == :f and length(e.args) == 2
            return [:X => e.args[1], :Y => e.args[2]]
        end
    end
end

EMatching throws a wrench into the simplicity that you need to return multiple matches and traverse a search through the multiple enodes per eclass. Nevertheless, for concrete patterns, it isn’t really that complicated either.

#pattern f(X)
function matchfx(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if f.head == :f && length(f.args) == 1
            push!(buf, f.args[1])
        end
    end
    return buf
end

#pattern f(X,Y) returns 2 variable bindings
function matchfxy(G, e::Int64)
buf = []
for enode in G[e]
    if f.head == :f && length(f.args) == 2
        push!(buf, [f.arg[1], f.arg[2]])
    end
end
return buf
end

#pattern f(X,X) requires a check 
function match(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if f.head == :f && f.args[1] == f.args[2]
            push!(buf, f.args[1])
        end
    end
    return buf
end

#f(g(X)) requires deeper traversal. # of loops is proprtional to number of eclasses expanded
function matchfgx(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if enode.head == :f and length(f.args) == 1
            for enode in G[f.args[1]]
                if enode.head == :g and length(enode.args) == 1
                    push!(buf, enode.args[0])
                end
            end
        end
    end
end

Ok, well how can we generate these?

An Interpreter

I just so happen to know from the egg https://egraphs-good.github.io/ paper and the de Moura, Bjorner paper http://leodemoura.github.io/files/ematching.pdf that it is smart to compile patterns into a sequence of instructions. This is also similar to what is done in Prolog with the Warren Abstract Machine. Sequences of instructions clarify the control flow compared to directly writing recursive functions to interpret patterns. This explicit control flow is subtly important for the ability to stage programs.

For what I’ve shown above we need 3 instructions

  1. Opening up an eclass. This makes a for loop
  2. Checking if two variables are the same like in f(X,X)
  3. Yielding a binding of variables

Here is a simple data type to describe patterns and a helper macro to construct them. It considers capital symbols to be variables.

@auto_hash_equals struct Pattern
    head::Symbol
    args
end

struct PatVar
    name::Symbol
end

pat(e::Symbol) = isuppercase(String(e)[1]) ? PatVar(e) : Pattern(e, [])
pat(e::Expr) = Pattern(e.args[1], pat.(e.args[2:end]) )
macro pat(e) 
    return pat(e)
end
# example usage: @pat f(g(X), X)

And here are the data types Bind, CheckClassEq, Yield of the instructions of my language corresponding to 1-3 above.

@auto_hash_equals struct ENodePat
    head::Symbol
    args::Vector{Symbol}
end

@auto_hash_equals struct Bind 
    eclass::Symbol
    enodepat::ENodePat
end

@auto_hash_equals struct CheckClassEq
    eclass1::Symbol
    eclass2::Symbol
end

@auto_hash_equals struct Yield
    yields::Vector{Symbol}
end

Here is a function that takes a Pattern and turns it into a sequence of instructions by traversing it depth first. This may not be the most optimal ordering to produce. During the pass I maintain a context from which you can lookup variables from the Pattern and find their new names that I bound in the Insns.

function compile_pat(eclass, p::Pattern,ctx)
    a = [gensym() for i in 1:length(p.args) ]
    return vcat(  Bind(eclass, ENodePat(p.head, a  )) , [compile_pat(eclass, p2, ctx) for (eclass , p2) in zip(a, p.args)]...)
end

function compile_pat(eclass, p::PatVar,ctx)
    if haskey(ctx, p.name)
        return CheckClassEq(eclass, ctx[p.name])
    else
        ctx[p.name] = eclass
        return []
    end
end
    
function compile_pat(p)
    ctx = Dict()
    insns = compile_pat(:start, p, ctx)
    
    return vcat(insns, Yield( [values(ctx)...]) ), ctx
end

Then I can write an interpreter over these instructions. You case on which instruction type. If it is a Bind you make a for loop over all ENodes in that eclass, check if the head matches the pattern’s head and the length is right, add all the new found enode numbers to the context, and finally recurse into the next instruction. If it is a CheckClassEq you check with the context to see if we should stop this branch of the search. If it is a Yield we add the current solution to the buf. The buf thing came up in Alessandro’s journey to optimize the ematcher in Metatheory.jl https://github.com/0x0f0f0f/Metatheory.jl and it really cleared things up for me compared to my monstrous Channel based implementation.

function interp_unstaged(G, insns, ctx, buf) 
    if length(insns) == 0
        return 
    end
    insn = insns[1]
    insns = insns[2:end]
    if insn isa Bind
        for enode in G[ctx[insn.eclass]] 
            if enode.head == insn.enodepat.head && length(enode.args) == length(insn.enodepat.args)
                        for (n,v) in enumerate(insn.enodepat.args)
                            ctx[v] = enode.args[n]
                        end
                        interp_unstaged(G,  insns, ctx, buf)
                end
            end
        end
    elseif insn isa Yield
        quote
            push!( buf, [ctx[y] for y in insn.yields])
        end
    elseif insn isa CheckClassEq
        quote
            if ctx[insn.eclass1] == ctx[insn.eclass2]
                interp_unstaged(G, insns, ctx, buf)
            end
        end
    end
end

function interp_unstaged(G, insns, eclass0)
        buf = []
        interp_unstaged(G, insns, Dict{Symbol,Any}([:start => eclass0]) , buf)
        return buf
end

Ok, that is kind of complicated but also kind of not. It’s may be more complicated to explain and read than it is to write.

Let’s stage it!

Staging the Intepreter

We know the Pattern at compile time, but we want to run matches many, many times quickly at runtime. It makes sense to partially evaluate things. Let’s look at a related example first.

An aside: Partial Evaluating Many For Loops

Consider a brute force search over 3 bits. You could write it like this

for i in (false,true)
    for j in (false, true)
        for k in (false,true)
            println([i,j,k])
        end
    end
end

Now suppose I want code that works for arbitrary number n of bits. A bit more complicated. One way of doing it is via recursion. If you know how to solve the n-1 bits problem, all you need to do is run that problem in a single extra loop.

function allbits(n, partial)
   if n == 0
        println(partial)
        return 
   end
   for i in (false,true)
       partial[n] = i
       allbits(n-1, partial)
   end
end
function allbits(n) 
    allbits(n, fill(false, n))
end

We can by adding quasiquotation annotations to this code actually produce the same code as above. We assume n is known at compile time. We also know the size of the partial vector, but the values inside the partial vector are no longer boolean values, instead they represent the code of boolean values available at runtime.
It is unfortunate that I need to gensym the i variable. Perhaps there are facilities in Julia to avoid this, perhaps not. Note however that the code is otherwise structurally identical to the above.

function allbits(n, partial::Vector{Symbol})
   if n == 0
        return :(println([$(partial...)]))  
   end
    i = gensym()
    quote
       for $i in (false,true)
           $(begin
                partial[n] = i
                allbits(n-1, partial)
            end)
       end
   end
end
function allbits(n) 
    allbits(n, fill(:foo, n))
end

prettify(allbits(3))
#=
:(for coati = (false, true)
      for caterpillar = (false, true)
          for seahorse = (false, true)
              println([seahorse, caterpillar, coati])
          end
      end
  end)
=#
# To use
eval(allbits(3))

Staged Interpeter

I just so have happened to have written the unstaged interpreter that very minimal changes are necessary to build the staged version.

Now the ctx is a compile time mapping of Insn variables to the expressions that at runtime will hold the appropriate values. G and buf are the runtime values that hold the egraph and vector of return variable bindings.
The way I did this is going through and thinking about what is avaiable at compile time and keeping it out of quotes, and what is available at runtime and putting it in quotes. It is a remarkably mechanical process to write this stuff once you get the hang of it. I suggest reading Oleg Kiselyov’s tutorials and mini-book for more.

Code = Union{Expr,Symbol}

function interp_staged(G::Code, insns, ctx, buf::Code) # G could be an argument or a global variable.
    if length(insns) == 0
        return 
    end
    insn = insns[1]
    insns = insns[2:end]
    if insn isa Bind
        enode = gensym(:enode)
        quote
            for $enode in $G[$(ctx[insn.eclass])] # we can store an integer of the eclass.
                if $enode.head == $(QuoteNode(insn.enodepat.head)) && length($enode.args) == $(length(insn.enodepat.args))
                    $(
                        begin
                        for (n,v) in enumerate(insn.enodepat.args)
                            ctx[v] = :($enode.args[$n])
                        end
                        interp_staged(G,  insns, ctx, buf)
                        end
                    )
                end
            end
        end
    elseif insn isa Yield
        quote
            push!( $buf, [ $( [ctx[y] for y in insn.yields]...) ])
        end
    elseif insn isa CheckClassEq
        quote
            if $(ctx[insn.eclass1]) == $(ctx[insn.eclass2])
                $(interp_staged(G, insns, ctx, buf))
            end
        end
    end
end

function interp_staged(insns)
    quote
        (G, eclass0) -> begin
            buf = []
            $(interp_staged(:G, insns, Dict{Symbol,Any}([:start => :eclass0]) , :buf))
            return buf
        end
    end
end

using MacroTools # for prettify
p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))
println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
#=
(G, eclass0)->begin
        buf = []
        for sardine = G[eclass0]
            if sardine.head == :f && length(sardine.args) == 1
                push!(buf, [sardine.args[1]])
            end
        end
        return buf
    end
=#

Bits and Bobbles

Example tests

@testset "Basic Compile" begin
    @test compile_pat(@pat f)[1] == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f, [])), Yield([])]

    p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx1[:X]]  )), Yield([ctx1[:X]])]
    
    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, Y))
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx[:X], ctx[:Y] ]  )), 
                 Yield([ctx[:X], ctx[:Y]])]
    @test ctx[:X] != ctx[:Y]
    @test length(ctx) == 2

    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, X))
    x2 = p1[1].enodepat.args[2]
    @test length(ctx) == 1
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx[:X], x2 ]  )), 
                 CheckClassEq( x2 , ctx[:X] ),
                 Yield([ctx[:X]])]

    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(g(X)))
    g = p1[1].enodepat.args[1]
    @test length(ctx) == 1
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [g ]  )),
                Bind(g, ENodePat(:g,  [ctx[:X] ]  )) ,
                Yield([ctx[:X]])]

end

using MacroTools
@testset "Basic Match" begin
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fa = addexpr!(G, :( f(a)  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))

    p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))

    println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ a ] ]
    @test match(G, fb) == [ [ b ] ]
    union!(G, fa, fb)
    #println(G)
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ b ], [ a ]  ]
    union!(G, a, b)
    #println(G)
    #println(congruences(G))
    propagate_congruence(G)
    #println(G)
    #println(congruences(G))
    rebuild!(G) # There is something kind of sick here.
    #println(G)
    a = addexpr!(G, :a)
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ a ] ]


    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(g(X)))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fga = addexpr!(G, :( f(g(a))  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))
    @test match(G,fb) == []
    @test match(G,fga) == [[a]]
    union!(G, fb, fga)
    @test match(G,fb) == [[a]]
    @test match(G,fga) == [[a]]



    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, X))
    #println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fga = addexpr!(G, :( f(g(a))  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))
    fab = addexpr!(G, :( f(a,b)  ))
    @test match(G,fab) == []
    faa = addexpr!(G, :( f(a,a)  ))
    @test match(G,faa) == [[a]]
    @test match(G,fab) == []
    union!(G,a,b)
    rebuild!(G)
    #propagate_congruence(G)
    @test match(G,faa) == [[b]]
    @test match(G,fab) == [[b]]



    #println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
end

Partial Evaluation of a Pattern Matcher for E-graphs

By: Philip Zucker

Re-posted from: https://www.philipzucker.com/staging-patterns/

Partial Evaluation is cool.

There are different interpretations of what partial evaluation means. I think the term can be applied to anything that you’re, well, partially evaluating. This might include really reaching down into and ripping apart the AST of a code block finding things like 1 + 7 and replacing them with 8.
However, my mental model of partial evaluation is a function that takes 2 arguments, one given at compile time and one at run time. Given the argument at compile time, you can hopefully do all sorts of decisions and control flow choices based off that information.
What I know of this, I’ve learned from reading Oleg Kiselyov http://okmij.org/ftp/meta-programming/index.html and his and other’s work in MetaOcaml. Sometimes this technique is called staged metaprogramming, or generative metaprogramming because you don’t really peek inside of Expr.

I wrote an implementation of a pattern matching in EGraphs that is slow. https://www.philipzucker.com/egraph-2/ I think partial evaluation in this style is a nice way to speed it up.

A useful pattern for organizing programming tasks is to build tiny programming languages (DSLs) and then write a function that takes a data structure containing a program written in this tiny language and interprets them over inputs. It is very often the case that the actual form of this program one is going to interpret is known at compile time.

A reasonable problem solving strategy is

  1. Try some maximally concrete examples and see what hand written code you would write
  2. Write an interpreter over some DSL describing the class of programs
  3. Stage the interpreter with quasiquotation, rearranging minimally as necessary.
  4. Check that your examples produce the same code or good enough compared to your hand written code.

So let’s start with 1.

Pattern matching feels a little scary, but when you actually sit down to do it on a concrete pattern, it ends up being a straightforward and boring pile of if-then-else clauses.

Here’s some straightforward examples of regular pattern matching

# pattern f(X)
function matchfx(e)
    if e isa Expr
        if e.head == :f and length(e.args) == 1
            return e.args[1]
        end
    end
end

# pattern f(X,Y)
function matchfxy(e)
    if e isa Expr
        if e.head == :f and length(e.args) == 2
            return [:X => e.args[1], :Y => e.args[2]]
        end
    end
end

EMatching throws a wrench into the simplicity that you need to return multiple matches and traverse a search through the multiple enodes per eclass. Nevertheless, for concrete patterns, it isn’t really that complicated either.

#pattern f(X)
function matchfx(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if enode.head == :f && length(enode.args) == 1
            push!(buf, enode.args[1])
        end
    end
    return buf
end

#pattern f(X,Y) returns 2 variable bindings
function matchfxy(G, e::Int64)
buf = []
for enode in G[e]
    if enode.head == :f && length(enode.args) == 2
        push!(buf, [enode.arg[1], enode.arg[2]])
    end
end
return buf
end

#pattern f(X,X) requires a check 
function match(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if enode.head == :f && enode.args[1] == enode.args[2]
            push!(buf, enode.args[1])
        end
    end
    return buf
end

#f(g(X)) requires deeper traversal. # of loops is proprtional to number of eclasses expanded
function matchfgx(G, e::Int64)
    buf = []
    for enode in G[e]
        if enode.head == :f and length(f.args) == 1
            for enode in G[f.args[1]]
                if enode.head == :g and length(enode.args) == 1
                    push!(buf, enode.args[0])
                end
            end
        end
    end
end

Ok, well how can we generate these?

An Interpreter

I just so happen to know from the egg https://egraphs-good.github.io/ paper and the de Moura, Bjorner paper http://leodemoura.github.io/files/ematching.pdf that it is smart to compile patterns into a sequence of instructions. This is also similar to what is done in Prolog with the Warren Abstract Machine. Sequences of instructions clarify the control flow compared to directly writing recursive functions to interpret patterns. This explicit control flow is subtly important for the ability to stage programs.

For what I’ve shown above we need 3 instructions

  1. Opening up an eclass. This makes a for loop
  2. Checking if two variables are the same like in f(X,X)
  3. Yielding a binding of variables

Here is a simple data type to describe patterns and a helper macro to construct them. It considers capital symbols to be variables.

@auto_hash_equals struct Pattern
    head::Symbol
    args
end

struct PatVar
    name::Symbol
end

pat(e::Symbol) = isuppercase(String(e)[1]) ? PatVar(e) : Pattern(e, [])
pat(e::Expr) = Pattern(e.args[1], pat.(e.args[2:end]) )
macro pat(e) 
    return pat(e)
end
# example usage: @pat f(g(X), X)

And here are the data types Bind, CheckClassEq, Yield of the instructions of my language corresponding to 1-3 above.

@auto_hash_equals struct ENodePat
    head::Symbol
    args::Vector{Symbol}
end

@auto_hash_equals struct Bind 
    eclass::Symbol
    enodepat::ENodePat
end

@auto_hash_equals struct CheckClassEq
    eclass1::Symbol
    eclass2::Symbol
end

@auto_hash_equals struct Yield
    yields::Vector{Symbol}
end

Here is a function that takes a Pattern and turns it into a sequence of instructions by traversing it depth first. This may not be the most optimal ordering to produce. During the pass I maintain a context from which you can lookup variables from the Pattern and find their new names that I bound in the Insns.

function compile_pat(eclass, p::Pattern,ctx)
    a = [gensym() for i in 1:length(p.args) ]
    return vcat(  Bind(eclass, ENodePat(p.head, a  )) , [compile_pat(eclass, p2, ctx) for (eclass , p2) in zip(a, p.args)]...)
end

function compile_pat(eclass, p::PatVar,ctx)
    if haskey(ctx, p.name)
        return CheckClassEq(eclass, ctx[p.name])
    else
        ctx[p.name] = eclass
        return []
    end
end
    
function compile_pat(p)
    ctx = Dict()
    insns = compile_pat(:start, p, ctx)
    
    return vcat(insns, Yield( [values(ctx)...]) ), ctx
end

Then I can write an interpreter over these instructions. You case on which instruction type. If it is a Bind you make a for loop over all ENodes in that eclass, check if the head matches the pattern’s head and the length is right, add all the new found enode numbers to the context, and finally recurse into the next instruction. If it is a CheckClassEq you check with the context to see if we should stop this branch of the search. If it is a Yield we add the current solution to the buf. The buf thing came up in Alessandro’s journey to optimize the e-matcher in Metatheory.jl https://github.com/0x0f0f0f/Metatheory.jl and it really cleared things up for me compared to my monstrous Channel based implementation.

# uh is this code even right? In all honesty I made it by de-staging the code below.
function interp_unstaged(G, insns, ctx, buf)
    if length(insns) == 0
        return 
    end
    insn = insns[1]
    insns = insns[2:end]
    if insn isa Bind
        for enode in G[ctx[insn.eclass]] 
            if enode.head == insn.enodepat.head && length(enode.args) == length(insn.enodepat.args)
                        for (n,v) in enumerate(insn.enodepat.args)
                            ctx[v] = enode.args[n]
                        end
                        interp_unstaged(G,  insns, ctx, buf)
                end
            end
        end
    elseif insn isa Yield
        quote
            push!( buf, [ctx[y] for y in insn.yields])
        end
    elseif insn isa CheckClassEq
        quote
            if ctx[insn.eclass1] == ctx[insn.eclass2]
                interp_unstaged(G, insns, ctx, buf)
            end
        end
    end
end

function interp_unstaged(G, insns, eclass0)
        buf = []
        interp_unstaged(G, insns, Dict{Symbol,Any}([:start => eclass0]) , buf)
        return buf
end

Ok, that is kind of complicated but also kind of not. It’s may be more complicated to explain and read than it is to write.

Let’s stage it!

Staging the Intepreter

We know the Pattern at compile time, but we want to run matches many, many times quickly at runtime. It makes sense to partially evaluate things. Let’s look at a related example first.

An aside: Partial Evaluating Many For Loops

Consider a brute force search over 3 bits. You could write it like this

for i in (false,true)
    for j in (false, true)
        for k in (false,true)
            println([i,j,k])
        end
    end
end

Now suppose I want code that works for arbitrary number n of bits. A bit more complicated. One way of doing it is via recursion. If you know how to solve the n-1 bits problem, all you need to do is run that problem in a single extra loop.

function allbits(n, partial)
   if n == 0
        println(partial)
        return 
   end
   for i in (false,true)
       partial[n] = i
       allbits(n-1, partial)
   end
end
function allbits(n) 
    allbits(n, fill(false, n))
end

We can by adding quasiquotation annotations to this code actually produce the same code as above. We assume n is known at compile time. We also know the size of the partial vector, but the values inside the partial vector are no longer boolean values, instead they represent the code of boolean values available at runtime.
It is unfortunate that I need to gensym the i variable. Perhaps there are facilities in Julia to avoid this, perhaps not. Note however that the code is otherwise structurally identical to the above.

function allbits(n, partial::Vector{Symbol})
   if n == 0
        return :(println([$(partial...)]))  
   end
    i = gensym()
    quote
       for $i in (false,true)
           $(begin
                partial[n] = i
                allbits(n-1, partial)
            end)
       end
   end
end
function allbits(n) 
    allbits(n, fill(:foo, n))
end

prettify(allbits(3))
#=
:(for coati = (false, true)
      for caterpillar = (false, true)
          for seahorse = (false, true)
              println([seahorse, caterpillar, coati])
          end
      end
  end)
=#
# To use
eval(allbits(3))

Staged Interpeter

I just so have happened to have written the unstaged interpreter that very minimal changes are necessary to build the staged version.

Now the ctx is a compile time mapping of Insn variables to the expressions that at runtime will hold the appropriate values. G and buf are the runtime values that hold the egraph and vector of return variable bindings.
The way I did this is going through and thinking about what is avaiable at compile time and keeping it out of quotes, and what is available at runtime and putting it in quotes. It is a remarkably mechanical process to write this stuff once you get the hang of it. I suggest reading Oleg Kiselyov’s tutorials and mini-book for more.

Code = Union{Expr,Symbol}

function interp_staged(G::Code, insns, ctx, buf::Code) # G could be an argument or a global variable.
    if length(insns) == 0
        return 
    end
    insn = insns[1]
    insns = insns[2:end]
    if insn isa Bind
        enode = gensym(:enode)
        quote
            for $enode in $G[$(ctx[insn.eclass])] # we can store an integer of the eclass.
                if $enode.head == $(QuoteNode(insn.enodepat.head)) && length($enode.args) == $(length(insn.enodepat.args))
                    $(
                        begin
                        for (n,v) in enumerate(insn.enodepat.args)
                            ctx[v] = :($enode.args[$n])
                        end
                        interp_staged(G,  insns, ctx, buf)
                        end
                    )
                end
            end
        end
    elseif insn isa Yield
        quote
            push!( $buf, [ $( [ctx[y] for y in insn.yields]...) ])
        end
    elseif insn isa CheckClassEq
        quote
            if $(ctx[insn.eclass1]) == $(ctx[insn.eclass2])
                $(interp_staged(G, insns, ctx, buf))
            end
        end
    end
end

function interp_staged(insns)
    quote
        (G, eclass0) -> begin
            buf = []
            $(interp_staged(:G, insns, Dict{Symbol,Any}([:start => :eclass0]) , :buf))
            return buf
        end
    end
end

using MacroTools # for prettify
p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))
println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
#=
(G, eclass0)->begin
        buf = []
        for sardine = G[eclass0]
            if sardine.head == :f && length(sardine.args) == 1
                push!(buf, [sardine.args[1]])
            end
        end
        return buf
    end
=#

Bits and Bobbles

Example tests

@testset "Basic Compile" begin
    @test compile_pat(@pat f)[1] == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f, [])), Yield([])]

    p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx1[:X]]  )), Yield([ctx1[:X]])]
    
    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, Y))
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx[:X], ctx[:Y] ]  )), 
                 Yield([ctx[:X], ctx[:Y]])]
    @test ctx[:X] != ctx[:Y]
    @test length(ctx) == 2

    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, X))
    x2 = p1[1].enodepat.args[2]
    @test length(ctx) == 1
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [ctx[:X], x2 ]  )), 
                 CheckClassEq( x2 , ctx[:X] ),
                 Yield([ctx[:X]])]

    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(g(X)))
    g = p1[1].enodepat.args[1]
    @test length(ctx) == 1
    @test p1 == [Bind(:start, ENodePat(:f,  [g ]  )),
                Bind(g, ENodePat(:g,  [ctx[:X] ]  )) ,
                Yield([ctx[:X]])]

end

using MacroTools
@testset "Basic Match" begin
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fa = addexpr!(G, :( f(a)  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))

    p1, ctx1 = compile_pat(@pat f(X))

    println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ a ] ]
    @test match(G, fb) == [ [ b ] ]
    union!(G, fa, fb)
    #println(G)
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ b ], [ a ]  ]
    union!(G, a, b)
    #println(G)
    #println(congruences(G))
    propagate_congruence(G)
    #println(G)
    #println(congruences(G))
    rebuild!(G) # There is something kind of sick here.
    #println(G)
    a = addexpr!(G, :a)
    @test match(G, fa) == [ [ a ] ]


    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(g(X)))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fga = addexpr!(G, :( f(g(a))  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))
    @test match(G,fb) == []
    @test match(G,fga) == [[a]]
    union!(G, fb, fga)
    @test match(G,fb) == [[a]]
    @test match(G,fga) == [[a]]



    p1, ctx = compile_pat(@pat f(X, X))
    #println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
    match = eval(interp_staged( p1  ))
    G = EGraph()
    a = addexpr!(G, :a) 
    b = addexpr!(G, :b) 
    fga = addexpr!(G, :( f(g(a))  ))
    fb = addexpr!(G, :( f(b)  ))
    fab = addexpr!(G, :( f(a,b)  ))
    @test match(G,fab) == []
    faa = addexpr!(G, :( f(a,a)  ))
    @test match(G,faa) == [[a]]
    @test match(G,fab) == []
    union!(G,a,b)
    rebuild!(G)
    #propagate_congruence(G)
    @test match(G,faa) == [[b]]
    @test match(G,fab) == [[b]]



    #println(prettify(interp_staged( p1  )))
end