Difference between revisions of "Output/Input"

From HaskellWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Wrong word >_<)
m
 
(62 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
<div style="border-left:1px solid lightgray; padding: 1em" alt="blockquote">
[[Category:Code]]
 
  +
A purely functional program implements a <i>function</i>; it has no side effect. [...] if the side effect can’t be in the functional program, it will have to be outside it.
   
  +
<small>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210415200634/https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.13.9123&rep=rep1&type=pdf Tackling the Awkward Squad: monadic input/output, concurrency, exceptions, and foreign-language calls in Haskell], Simon Peyton Jones (pages 3-4 of 60). </small>
Let me guess...you've read every other guide, tutorial, lesson and introduction and none of them have helped - you still don't understand I/O in Haskell.
 
  +
</div>
   
  +
One technique has been used for similar tasks:
Alright then, have a look at this:
 
   
  +
<div style="border-left:1px solid lightgray; padding: 1em" alt="blockquote">
<haskell>
 
  +
This is discussed by Burton[https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-pdf/31/3/243/1157325/310243.pdf <span></span>], and is built on by Harrison[https://core.ac.uk/download/9835633.pdf <span></span>]. The effect of this proposal is to place the non-determinism <i>entirely</i> outside the software [...]
data OI -- abstract, primitive
 
   
  +
<small>[https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-pdf/32/2/162/1445725/320162.pdf Functional Programming and Operating Systems], Simon B. Jones and A. F. Sinclair (page 10 of 13).</small>
partOI :: OI -> (OI, OI) --
 
  +
</div>
getchar :: OI -> Char -- primitives
 
putchar :: Char -> OI -> () --
 
   
  +
It can also be used to provide access to external resources:
seq :: a -> b -> b -- also primitive
 
   
  +
<div style="border-left:1px solid lightgray; padding: 1em" alt="blockquote">
instance Partible OI where ...
 
  +
The approach generalizes so that a program can make use of other run-time information such as the current time or current amount of available storage.
   
  +
<small>[https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-pdf/31/3/243/1157325/310243.pdf Nondeterminism with Referential Transparency in Functional Programming Languages], F. Warren Burton (front page).</small>
class Partible a where
 
  +
</div>
part :: a -> (a, a)
 
parts :: a -> [a]
 
.
 
.
 
.
 
</haskell>
 
 
No up-front explanation; I'm guessing you've seen more than enough of those, so I'm trying something different. I will explain it later...
 
   
  +
Perhaps it can be used for I/O...
Yes, of course there's more to Haskell I/O than <code>getchar</code> and <code>putchar</code>; I've downsized it for convenience. If you want, you can add the rest afterwards...
 
  +
<br>
   
  +
__TOC__
Yes, they're somewhat arcane, but they can be used to emulate all the classic approaches to I/O in Haskell, albeit in miniature:
 
  +
<sup> <sup>
   
  +
----
<haskell>
 
  +
=== <u>Details, details</u> ===
module ClassicIO where
 
import qualified Prelude as T
 
import Prelude(Char, String)
 
import Prelude(($), (.))
 
import Data.List(map, foldr, zipWith)
 
import OutputInput
 
import Partible
 
   
  +
How does it work?
-- simple text --
 
   
  +
<div style="border-left:1px solid lightgray; padding: 1em" alt="blockquote">
{- main :: (String -> String) -}
 
  +
[...] supply each program with an extra argument consisting of an infinite (lazy) binary tree of values. (We choose a tree [...] since any number of subtrees may be extracted from an infinite tree). In practice, these values will be determined at run time (when used as arguments to a special function [...]), but once fixed will never change.
  +
</div>
   
  +
...<i>“a special function”</i>: only one? More will definitely be needed! To keep matters [https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/kiss-keep-it-simple-stupid-a-design-principle simple], each value shall only be used <b>once</b> (if at all) as an argument to any such function.
runMain_text :: (String -> String) -> OI -> ()
 
runMain_text main = \u -> case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
putchars (main (getchars u1)) u2
 
   
  +
<haskell>
getchars :: OI -> String
 
  +
main' :: Tree Exterior -> ...
getchars = foldr (\c cs -> seq c (c:cs)) [] . map getchar . parts
 
   
  +
-- section 2
putchars :: String -> OI -> ()
 
  +
data Tree a = Node { contents :: a,
putchars s = foldr seq () . zipWith putchar s . parts
 
  +
left :: Tree a,
  +
right :: Tree a }
   
  +
data Exterior -- the abstract value type
 
  +
getchar :: Exterior -> Char -- the special functions
-- dialogues --
 
  +
putchar :: Char -> Exterior -> () -- (add more as needed :-)
 
{- main :: Dialogue -}
 
 
runMain_dial :: Dialogue -> OI -> ()
 
runMain_dial main = \u -> foldr seq () $ yet $
 
\l -> zipWith respond (main l) (parts u)
 
 
type Dialogue = [Response] -> [Request]
 
 
data Request = Getq | Putq Char
 
data Response = Getp Char | Putp
 
 
yet :: (a -> a) -> a
 
yet f = f (yet f)
 
 
respond :: Request -> OI -> Response
 
respond Getq = \u -> case getchar u of c -> seq c (Getp c)
 
respond (Putq c) = \u -> seq (putchar c u) Putp
 
 
 
-- continuations --
 
 
{- main :: (() -> IOResult) -> IOResult -}
 
 
runMain_cont :: ((() -> IOResult) -> IOResult) -> OI -> ()
 
runMain_cont main = call (main done)
 
 
newtype IOResult = R (OI -> ())
 
 
call :: IOResult -> OI -> ()
 
call (R a) = a
 
 
done :: () -> IOResult
 
done () = R $ \ u -> part u `seq` ()
 
 
getchar_cont :: (Char -> IOResult) -> IOResult
 
getchar_cont k = R $ \u -> case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
case getchar u1 of
 
c -> seq c (call (k c) u2)
 
 
putchar_cont :: Char -> (() -> IOResult) -> IOResult
 
putchar_cont c k = R $ \u -> case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
seq (putchar c u1) (call (k ()) u2)
 
 
-- state-passing --
 
 
{- main :: IOState -> ((), IOState) -}
 
 
runMain_stat :: (IOState -> ((), IOState)) -> OI -> ()
 
runMain_stat main = \u -> seq (main (ini_st u)) ()
 
 
newtype IOState = S OI
 
 
ini_st :: OI -> IOState
 
ini_st = S
 
 
getchar_stat :: IOState -> (Char, IOState)
 
getchar_stat (S u) = case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
case getchar u1 of
 
c -> seq c (c, S u2)
 
 
putchar_stat :: Char -> IOState -> ((), IOState)
 
putchar_stat c (S u) = case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
seq (putchar c u1) ((), S u2)
 
 
-- and those weird, fickle things ;-)
 
 
{- main :: IO () -}
 
 
runMain_wfth :: IO () -> OI -> ()
 
runMain_wfth main = main
 
 
type IO a = OI -> a
 
 
getchar_wfth :: IO Char
 
getchar_wfth = getchar
 
 
putchar_wfth :: Char -> IO ()
 
putchar_wfth = putchar
 
 
unit :: a -> IO a
 
unit x = \u -> part u `seq` x
 
 
bind :: IO a -> (a -> IO b) -> IO b
 
bind m k = \u -> case part u of
 
(u1, u2) -> (\x -> x `seq` k x u2) (m u1)
 
 
-- supporting definitions --
 
--
 
getchar :: OI -> Char
 
getchar = "getchar" `invokes` T.getChar
 
 
putchar :: Char -> OI -> ()
 
putchar c = "putchar" `invokes` T.putChar c
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
Avoiding gratuitous repetition:
What was that - using <code>Prelude.seq</code> that way won't work in Haskell 2010? You are ''correct!''<br>
 
Now look closely at those imports...
 
 
Moving on, here are examples using each of those approaches:
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
type OI = Tree Exterior
module Echoes where
 
import Prelude(String, Char(..), Eq(..))
 
import Prelude(($))
 
import ClassicIO
 
import OutputInput(runOI)
 
 
echo_text :: String -> String
 
echo_text (c:cs) = if c == '\n' then [] else c : echo_text cs
 
 
echo_dial :: Dialogue
 
echo_dial p = Getq :
 
case p of
 
Getp c : p' ->
 
if c == '\n' then
 
[]
 
else
 
Putq c :
 
case p' of
 
Putp : p'' -> echo_dial p''
 
 
echo_cont :: (() -> IOResult) -> IOResult
 
echo_cont k = getchar_cont $ \c ->
 
if c == '\n' then
 
k ()
 
else
 
putchar_cont c (\_ -> echo_cont k)
 
   
  +
getChar' :: OI -> Char
echo_stat :: IOState -> ((), IOState)
 
  +
getChar' = getchar . contents
echo_stat s = case getchar_stat s of
 
(c, s') ->
 
if c == '\n' then
 
((), s')
 
else
 
case putchar_stat c s' of
 
(_, s'') -> echo_stat s''
 
   
  +
putChar' :: Char -> OI -> ()
echo_wfth :: IO ()
 
  +
putChar' c = putchar c . contents
echo_wfth = getchar_wfth `bind` \c ->
 
if c == '\n' then
 
unit ()
 
else
 
putchar_wfth c `bind` \_ -> echo_wfth
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
  +
<sup> </sup>
   
  +
==== An alternative abstraction ====
Now that we're on the topic of implementation details, did you notice how easy it was to define that allegedly ''warm, fuzzy''[[#refs|[4]]] <code>IO</code> type using this curious new <code>OI</code> type, and those primitives?
 
   
  +
About those trees: are they really necessary? If <code>OI</code> was an abstract data type, the use of trees could at least be confined to the implementation:
Sometimes that can be a hint that doing the opposite will be difficult or even impossible while staying within standard Haskell 2010. As it happens, this is one of those cases...
 
 
To define <code>OI</code>, <code>partOI</code>, <code>getchar</code> and <code>putchar</code> will require:
 
 
* modifying your preferred Haskell implementation - lots of work;
 
 
* using some other language for the definitions, with Haskell then calling the foreign code - extra work to deal with two different languages;
 
 
* using unsafe or implementation-specific primitives - work needed to avoid conflicts with Haskell semantics;
 
 
* using implementation-specific extensions - work needed to track relevant extensions, and possible conflicts with Haskell semantics.
 
 
For now, I'll just use the extensions - they're ugly, but at least they'll be contained to their respecitve modules. But who knows - if this approach to I/O proves useful enough, it might make its way into a future Haskell standard...that's how <code>IO</code> happened[[#refs|[5]]].
 
 
In the meantime, take a very deep breath:
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
data OI
-- for GHC 8.6.5
 
  +
getChar' :: OI -> Char
{-# LANGUAGE MagicHash, UnboxedTuples #-}
 
  +
putChar' :: Char -> OI -> ()
module OutputInput(OI, Monomo, runOI, invokes, seq) where
 
import Prelude(Bool, Char, Double, Either, Float, Int, Integer, Maybe)
 
import Prelude(String, Eq(..))
 
import Prelude(($), (++), error, all)
 
import Control.Concurrent(ThreadId, MVar, Chan, QSem, QSemN)
 
import Control.Concurrent.STM(STM, TVar, TMVar, TChan, TQueue, TBQueue)
 
import Control.Concurrent.STM(TArray)
 
import Control.Monad.ST(ST)
 
import Data.Array(Array)
 
import Data.Array.IO(IOArray)
 
import Data.Array.ST(STArray)
 
import Data.Char(isSpace)
 
import Data.IORef(IORef)
 
import Data.STRef(STRef)
 
import Data.Time(UTCTime, NominalDiffTime, Day, TimeOfDay)
 
import Data.Time(LocalTime, TimeZone, ZonedTime)
 
import Data.Time(DiffTime)
 
import Data.Time(UniversalTime)
 
import System.Directory(XdgDirectory, XdgDirectoryList, Permissions)
 
import System.IO(Handle, IOMode, BufferMode, SeekMode, HandlePosn)
 
import System.IO(TextEncoding, Newline, NewlineMode)
 
import Partible
 
import Sequential
 
import GHC.Base(IO(..), State#, MutVar#, RealWorld)
 
import GHC.Base(seq#, newMutVar#, atomicModifyMutVar#, noDuplicate#)
 
 
data OI = OI OI#
 
 
instance Partible OI where
 
part = partOI
 
 
partOI :: OI -> (OI, OI)
 
partOI (OI h) = case part# h of (# h1, h2 #) -> (OI h1, OI h2)
 
 
runOI :: (OI -> a) -> IO a
 
runOI g = IO $ \s -> case dispense# s of
 
(# s', h #) -> seq# (g (OI h)) s'
 
 
invokes :: Monomo a => String -> IO a -> OI -> a
 
(name `invokes` IO act) (OI h)
 
= (name `invokes#` act) h
 
 
class Monomo a
 
 
-- local definitions --
 
--
 
type OI# = String -> State# RealWorld
 
 
part# :: OI# -> (# OI#, OI# #)
 
part# h = case h "partOI" of
 
s -> case dispense# s of
 
(# s', h1 #) ->
 
case dispense# s' of
 
(# _, h2 #) -> (# h1, h2 #)
 
 
dispense# :: IO# OI#
 
dispense# s = case newMutVar# () s of
 
(# s', r #) -> (# s', expire# s' r #)
 
 
expire# :: State# s -> MutVar# s () -> String -> State# s
 
expire# s r name = case atomicModifyMutVar# r use s of
 
(# s', () #) -> s'
 
where
 
use x = (error nowUsed, x)
 
nowUsed = name' ++ ": already expired"
 
name' = if all isSpace name then "(unknown)"
 
else name
 
 
invokes# :: Monomo a => String -> IO# a -> OI# -> a
 
(name `invokes#` act) h = case act (noDuplicate# (h name)) of (# _, t #) -> t
 
 
type IO# a = State# RealWorld -> (# State# RealWorld, a #)
 
 
-- supplemental instances --
 
--
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (Array a b)
 
instance Monomo Bool
 
instance Monomo BufferMode
 
instance Monomo Char
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (Chan a)
 
instance Monomo Day
 
instance Monomo DiffTime
 
instance Monomo Double
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (Either a b)
 
instance Monomo Float
 
instance Monomo Handle
 
instance Monomo HandlePosn
 
instance Monomo Int
 
instance Monomo Integer
 
instance Monomo (IO a)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (IOArray a b)
 
instance Monomo IOMode
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (IORef a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo [a]
 
instance Monomo LocalTime
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (Maybe a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (MVar a)
 
instance Monomo Newline
 
instance Monomo NewlineMode
 
instance Monomo NominalDiffTime
 
instance Monomo Permissions
 
instance Monomo QSem
 
instance Monomo QSemN
 
instance Monomo SeekMode
 
instance Monomo (ST s a)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (STArray s a b)
 
instance Monomo (STM a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (STRef s a)
 
instance Monomo TextEncoding
 
instance Monomo ThreadId
 
instance Monomo TimeOfDay
 
instance Monomo TimeZone
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (TArray a b)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (TBQueue a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (TChan a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (TMVar a)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (TQueue a)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b, Monomo c, Monomo d, Monomo e, Monomo f) => Monomo (a, b, c, d, e, f)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b, Monomo c, Monomo d, Monomo e) => Monomo (a, b, c, d, e)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b, Monomo c, Monomo d) => Monomo (a, b, c, d)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b, Monomo c) => Monomo (a, b, c)
 
instance (Monomo a, Monomo b) => Monomo (a, b)
 
instance Monomo a => Monomo (TVar a)
 
instance Monomo ()
 
instance Monomo UniversalTime
 
instance Monomo UTCTime
 
instance Monomo XdgDirectory
 
instance Monomo XdgDirectoryList
 
instance Monomo ZonedTime
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
...provided that single-use property applies directly to <code>OI</code> values (thereby deeming <i>“special”</i> any function which uses an <code>OI</code> argument). That includes the initial <code>OI</code> value supplied to each program:
Almost there; this replacement definition of <code>seq</code> should work as expected[[#refs|[1][2][3]]]:
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
-- for GHC 8.6.5
+
main' :: OI -> ...
{-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
 
#define during seq
 
module Sequential(seq) where
 
import qualified Prelude(during)
 
 
{-# NOINLINE seq #-}
 
infixr 0 `seq`
 
seq :: a -> b -> b
 
seq x y = Prelude.during x (case x of _ -> y)
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
But most Haskell programs will need more:
Now you can start breathing again :-)
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
part :: OI -> (OI, OI)
module Partible where
 
  +
part t = (left t, right t)
import Data.Array
 
import Data.List
 
 
class Partible a where
 
part :: a -> (a, a)
 
parts :: a -> [a]
 
 
-- Minimal complete definition: part or parts
 
part u = case parts u of u1:u2:_ -> (u1, u2)
 
parts u = case part u of (u1, u2) -> u1 : parts u2
 
 
instance (Ix a, Partible b) => Partible (Array a b) where
 
part arr = case unzip (map part' (assocs arr)) of
 
(al1, al2) -> (new al1, new al2)
 
where
 
new = array (bounds arr)
 
part' (i, u) = case part u of
 
(u1, u2) -> ((i, u1), (i, u2))
 
 
instance (Partible a, Partible b) => Partible (Either a b) where
 
parts (Left u) = map Left (parts u)
 
parts (Right v) = map Right (parts v)
 
 
instance (Partible a, Partible b, Partible c, Partible d, Partible e) => Partible (a, b, c, d, e) where
 
parts (u, v, w, x, y) = zipWith5 (,,,,) (parts u) (parts v) (parts w) (parts x) (parts y)
 
 
instance (Partible a, Partible b, Partible c, Partible d) => Partible (a, b, c, d) where
 
parts (u, v, w, x) = zipWith4 (,,,) (parts u) (parts v) (parts w) (parts x)
 
 
instance (Partible a, Partible b, Partible c) => Partible (a, b, c) where
 
parts (u, v, w) = zipWith3 (,,) (parts u) (parts v) (parts w)
 
 
instance (Partible a, Partible b) => Partible (a, b) where
 
parts (u, v) = zipWith (,) (parts u) (parts v)
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
...than two <code>OI</code> values:
You're having problems? Maybe one of these can help:
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
parts :: OI -> [OI]
-- for Sequential.hs
 
  +
parts t = let (t1, t2) = part t in t1 : parts t2
import GHC.Base(lazy)
 
  +
</haskell>
   
  +
So <code>OI</code> can be a tree-free abstract data type after all:
infixr 0 `seq`
 
seq :: a -> b -> b
 
seq x y = Prelude.during x (lazy y)
 
</haskell>
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
data OI
-- for ClassicIO.hs
 
yet :: (a -> a) -> a
+
partOI :: OI -> (OI, OI)
  +
getChar :: OI -> Char
yet f = y where y = f y
 
  +
putChar :: Char -> OI -> ()
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
  +
<sup> </sup>
   
  +
----
(You could also try another extensions-compatible version of GHC; beyond that, the options get more complicated...)
 
  +
=== <u>Other interfaces</u> ===
   
  +
* [[Monad|monad]]
Now, remember how I dispensed with an up-front explanation to try something different? Having just seen how different this all is, here's the explanation...
 
   
  +
:<haskell>
That abstract <code>partOI</code> and its overloaded associates <code>part</code> and <code>parts</code>? Their origins reside in the ''pseudodata'' technique by F. Warren Burton[[#refs|[6]]] - for our purposes, they help an optimising Haskell implementation to determine when it's safe to use those optimisations. Consider this definition:
 
  +
type M a = OI -> a
   
  +
unit :: a -> M a
<haskell>
 
  +
unit x = \ u -> let !_ = partOI u in x
testme n = n^2 + n^2
 
</haskell>
 
   
  +
bind :: M a -> (a -> M b) -> M b
One simple optimisation would be to replace the duplicates of <code>n^2</code> with a single, shared local definition:
 
  +
bind m k = \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !x = m u1 in
  +
let !y = k x u2 in
  +
y
   
  +
getcharM :: M Char
<haskell>
 
  +
getcharM = getChar
testme n = let x = n^2 in x + x
 
</haskell>
 
 
This definition:
 
 
<haskell>
 
main' u = putchars "ha" u `seq` putchars "ha" u
 
   
  +
putcharM :: Char -> M ()
  +
putcharM = putChar
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
* [[Comonad|comonad]]:
would likewise be rewritten, with the result being:
 
   
<haskell>
+
:<haskell>
main' u = let x = putchars "ha" u in x `seq` x
+
type C a = (OI, a)
</haskell>
 
   
  +
extract :: C a -> a
but, as noted by Philip Wadler[[#refs|[7]]]:
 
  +
extract (u, x) = let !_ = partOI u in x
   
  +
duplicate :: C a -> C (C a)
<blockquote>''[...] the laugh is on us: the program prints only a single <code>"ha"</code>, at the time variable <br><code>x</code> is bound. In the presence of side effects, equational reasoning in its simplest form <br>becomes invalid.''</blockquote>
 
  +
duplicate (u, x) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
(u2, (u1, x))
   
  +
extend :: (C a -> b) -> C a -> C b
''Equational reasoning'' is the basis for that simple optimisation and many others in implementations like GHC - so far they've been serving us quite well.
 
  +
extend h (u, x) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !y = h (u1, x) in
  +
(u2, y)
   
  +
getcharC :: C () -> Char
What - just treat I/O-centric definitions as some special case by modifying GHC? Haskell implementations are complicated enough as is!
 
  +
getcharC (u, ()) = getChar u
   
  +
putcharC :: C Char -> ()
The problem is being caused by the code being treated as though it's pure, so let's modify the code instead. In this case, one simple solution is to make all calls to I/O-centric definitions unique:
 
  +
putcharC (u, c) = putChar c u
   
<haskell>
 
main u = case part u of
 
(u1, u2) ->
 
putchars "ha" u1 `seq` putchars "ha" u2
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
* [[Arrow|arrow]]:
But what about:
 
   
<haskell>
+
:<haskell>
oops g h u = g u `seq` h u
+
type A b c = (OI -> b) -> (OI -> c)
   
main' = oops (putchars "ha") (putchars "ha")
+
arr :: (b -> c) -> A b c
  +
arr f = \ c' u -> let !x = c' u in f x
</haskell>
 
   
  +
both :: A b c -> A b' c' -> A (b, b') (c, c')
Will the laugh be on us, again?
 
  +
f' `both` g' = \ c' u -> let !(u1:u2:u3:_) = partsOI u in
  +
let !(x, x') = c' u1 in
  +
let !y = f' (unit x) u2 in
  +
let !y' = g' (unit x') u3 in
  +
(y, y')
  +
where
  +
unit x u = let !_ = partOI u in x
   
  +
getcharA :: A () Char
This is Haskell, not Clean[[#refs|[8]]] - there are no uniqueness types to help fend off such potentially-troublesome expressions. For now, the simplest way to make sure <code>OI</code> values are only used once is to have the implementation treat their reuse as being invalid e.g. by throwing an exception or raising an error to stop the offending program.
 
  +
getcharA = \ c' u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !_ = c' u1 in
  +
let !ch = getChar u2 in
  +
ch
   
  +
putcharA :: A Char ()
In the prototype implementation, this all-important ''single-use'' property is maintained by <code>expire#</code>.
 
  +
putcharA = \ c' u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !ch = c' u1 in
  +
let !z = putChar ch u2 in
  +
z
  +
</haskell>
   
  +
The <code>OI</code> interface can also be used to implement [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.91.3579&rep=rep1&type=pdf I/O models used in earlier versions] of Haskell:
As for that curious <code>Monomo</code> class and its instances, they leverage Haskell's type system to provide an extra measure of safety for the prototype - an actual implementation would instead use an annotation[[#refs|[9]]] to achieve the same result e.g:
 
   
  +
* dialogues:
<haskell>
 
newEmptyMVar :: monomo a . OI -> MVar a
 
</haskell>
 
   
  +
:<haskell>
Now for the much-maligned[[#refs|[10][11]]] <code>seq</code>...you could be tempted into avoiding it by using a new data type:
 
  +
runD :: ([Response] -> [Request]) -> OI -> ()
  +
runD d u = foldr (\ (!_) -> id) () $ yet $ \ l -> zipWith respond (d l) (partsOI u)
   
  +
yet :: (a -> a) -> a
<haskell>
 
  +
yet f = f (yet f)
newtype Result a = Is a
 
   
getchar' :: OI -> Result Char
+
respond :: Request -> OI -> Response
  +
respond Getq u = let !c = getChar u in Getp c
putchar' :: Char -> OI -> Result ()
 
  +
respond (Putq c) u = let !_ = putChar c u in Putp
</haskell>
 
   
  +
data Request = Getq | Putq Char
and case-expressions:
 
  +
data Response = Getp Char | Putp
 
<haskell>
 
respond' :: Request -> OI -> Response
 
respond' Getq = \u -> case getchar' u of Is c -> Getp c
 
respond' (Putq c) = \u -> case putchar' c u of Is _ -> Putp
 
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
* continuations:
But before you succumb:
 
   
<haskell>
+
:<haskell>
  +
type Answer = OI -> ()
unit_Result :: a -> Result a
 
unit_Result = Is
 
   
  +
runK :: Answer -> OI -> ()
bind_Result :: Result a -> (a -> Result b) -> Result b
 
  +
runK a u = a u
bind_Result (Is x) k = k x
 
</haskell>
 
   
  +
doneK :: Answer
Oh look - <code>Result</code> is one of '''those''' types[[#refs|[12]]]...
 
  +
doneK = \ u -> let !_ = partOI u in ()
   
  +
getcharK :: (Char -> Answer) -> Answer
The bang-pattern[[#refs|[13]]] extension? So you can instead write:
 
  +
getcharK k = \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !c = getChar u1 in
  +
let !a = k c in
  +
a u2
   
  +
putcharK :: Char -> Answer -> Answer
<haskell>
 
  +
putcharK c a = \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
respond'' :: Request -> OI -> Response
 
respond'' Getq = \u -> let !c = getchar u in Getp c
+
let !_ = putChar c u1 in
respond'' (Putq c) = \u -> let !z = putchar c u in Putp
+
a u2
 
</haskell>
 
</haskell>
   
  +
...and even <i>that</i> <s><i>world</i></s> state-passing style used in GHC, which is also used by [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.17.935&rep=rep1&type=pdf Clean], [https://staff.science.uva.nl/c.u.grelck/publications/HerhSchoGrelDAMP09.pdf Single-Assignment C] and as part of the I/O model used for the verification of interactive programs in [https://cakeml.org/vstte18.pdf CakeML], remembering that <code>OI</code> values can only be used once:
As you can see, <code>z</code> isn't used anywhere - there is no need for it. This being Haskell, if it isn't needed, it normally isn't evaluated. For now, the bang-pattern extension modifies the evaluation of
 
<code>z</code> in order to prevent <code>respond&apos;&apos;</code> being rewritten as:
 
   
 
<haskell>
 
<haskell>
  +
newtype World = W OI
respond'' :: Request -> OI -> Response
 
respond'' Getq = \u -> let !c = getchar u in Getp c
 
respond'' (Putq c) = \u -> Putp
 
</haskell>
 
   
  +
getcharL :: World -> (Char, World)
Will bang-patterns ever be included in a future Haskell standard? If so, will you still be able to use them like this? If not, will you be left with the clean-up job?
 
  +
getcharL (W u) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
  +
let !c = getChar u1 in
  +
(c, W u2)
   
  +
putcharL :: Char -> World -> World
Perhaps you'll find some other way for correctly sequencing the evaluation that you like; all well and good...but others might not. For me, the simplest way I've found to make this approach to I/O work is with <code>seq</code> - one that's actually sequential.
 
  +
putcharL c (W u) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
 
  +
let !_ = putChar c u1 in
But maybe - after all that - you still want <code>seq</code> banished from Haskell. Perhaps you still don't understand I/O in Haskell. It could be that you're dismayed by what you've read here. Alternately, you may have seen or tried this all before, and know it doesn't work all that well - darn...
 
  +
W u2
 
  +
</haskell>
If that's you, the corresponding language proposal[[#refs|[14]]] has a list of other articles and research papers I've found which describe or refer to alternative approaches - perhaps one (or more) of them will be more acceptable.
 
  +
<sup> </sup>
 
As noted by Owen Stephens[[#refs|[15]]]:
 
 
<blockquote>''I/O is not a particularly active area of research, but new approaches are still being discovered, <br>iteratees being a case in point.''</blockquote>
 
 
Who knows - the Haskell language could return to having a pure, fully-defined approach to I/O without the notoriety...and it could be you that finds it :-D
 
 
 
P.S: Why the name <code>OI</code>? Many years ago I was tinkering with arrows for performing I/O, labelling them <code>OI a b</code> out of expediency. More recently, I discovered a set of slides[[#refs|[16]]] describing another approach to I/O which used values of type <code>OI a</code> in a similar fashion to what I've been describing here. I've reused the name because of that similarity.
 
 
 
<span id="refs">References</span>:
 
 
[1] [[Sequential ordering of evaluation]]; Haskell Wiki.<br>
 
 
[2] [https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/5129 Ticket# 5129: "evaluate" optimized away]; GHC bug tracker.<br>
 
 
[3] [https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2006-November/011480.html Thread: seq vs. pseq]; Haskell mail archive.<br>
 
 
[4] [https://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~pszgmh/appsem-slides/peytonjones.ppt Wearing the hair shirt: a retrospective on Haskell]; Simon Peyton Jones.<br>
 
 
[5] [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.168.4008&rep=rep1&type=pdf A History of Haskell: being lazy with class]; Paul Hudak, John Hughes, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler.<br>
 
 
[6] [https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-pdf/31/3/243/1157325/310243.pdf Nondeterminism with Referential Transparency in Functional Programming Languages]; F. Warren Burton.<br>
 
 
[7] [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.91.3579&rep=rep1&type=pdf How to Declare an Imperative]; Philip Wadler.<br>
 
 
[8] [https://clean.cs.ru.nl/Clean The Clean homepage]; Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.<br>
 
 
[9] [[Monomorphism by annotation of type variables]]; Haskell Wiki.<br>
 
 
[10] [https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2002-May/009622.html Thread: State monads don't respect the monad laws in Haskell]; Haskell mail archive.<br>
 
 
[11] [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.71.1777&rep=rep1&type=pdf The Impact of ''seq'' on Free Theorems-Based Program Transformations]; Patricia Johann and Janis Voigtlander.
 
 
[12] [[Monad]]; Haskell Wiki.<br>
 
 
[13] [https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/7.8.4/docs/html/users_guide/bang-patterns.html 7.18. Bang patterns]; GHC user's guide.<br>
 
 
[14] [[Partibles for composing monads]]; Haskell Wiki.<br>
 
 
[15] [https://www.owenstephens.co.uk/assets/static/research/masters_report.pdf Approaches to Functional I/O]; Owen Stephens.<br>
 
   
  +
----
[16] <span style="color:#ba0000">Non-Imperative Functional Programming</span>; Nobuo Yamashita.<br>
 
  +
=== <u>See also</u> ===
   
  +
* [[Plainly partible]]
  +
* [[Disposing of dismissives]]
  +
* [[IO then abstraction]]
   
  +
[[Category:Theoretical foundations]]
[[User:Atravers|Atravers]] 03:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 

Latest revision as of 12:36, 1 January 2024

A purely functional program implements a function; it has no side effect. [...] if the side effect can’t be in the functional program, it will have to be outside it.

Tackling the Awkward Squad: monadic input/output, concurrency, exceptions, and foreign-language calls in Haskell, Simon Peyton Jones (pages 3-4 of 60).

One technique has been used for similar tasks:

This is discussed by Burton, and is built on by Harrison. The effect of this proposal is to place the non-determinism entirely outside the software [...]

Functional Programming and Operating Systems, Simon B. Jones and A. F. Sinclair (page 10 of 13).

It can also be used to provide access to external resources:

The approach generalizes so that a program can make use of other run-time information such as the current time or current amount of available storage.

Nondeterminism with Referential Transparency in Functional Programming Languages, F. Warren Burton (front page).

Perhaps it can be used for I/O...


Details, details

How does it work?

[...] supply each program with an extra argument consisting of an infinite (lazy) binary tree of values. (We choose a tree [...] since any number of subtrees may be extracted from an infinite tree). In practice, these values will be determined at run time (when used as arguments to a special function [...]), but once fixed will never change.

...“a special function”: only one? More will definitely be needed! To keep matters simple, each value shall only be used once (if at all) as an argument to any such function.

main' :: Tree Exterior -> ...

 -- section 2
data Tree a = Node { contents :: a,
                     left     :: Tree a,
                     right    :: Tree a }

data Exterior                      -- the abstract value type
getchar :: Exterior -> Char        -- the special functions
putchar :: Char -> Exterior -> ()  -- (add more as needed :-)

Avoiding gratuitous repetition:

type OI  =  Tree Exterior

getChar' :: OI -> Char
getChar' =  getchar . contents

putChar' :: Char -> OI -> ()
putChar' c = putchar c . contents

An alternative abstraction

About those trees: are they really necessary? If OI was an abstract data type, the use of trees could at least be confined to the implementation:

data OI
getChar' :: OI -> Char
putChar' :: Char -> OI -> ()

...provided that single-use property applies directly to OI values (thereby deeming “special” any function which uses an OI argument). That includes the initial OI value supplied to each program:

main' :: OI -> ...

But most Haskell programs will need more:

part    :: OI -> (OI, OI)
part t  =  (left t, right t)

...than two OI values:

parts   :: OI -> [OI]
parts t =  let (t1, t2) = part t in t1 : parts t2

So OI can be a tree-free abstract data type after all:

data OI
partOI  :: OI -> (OI, OI)
getChar :: OI -> Char
putChar :: Char -> OI -> ()


Other interfaces

type M a   =  OI -> a

unit       :: a -> M a
unit x     =  \ u -> let !_ = partOI u in x 

bind       :: M a -> (a -> M b) -> M b
bind m k   =  \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                     let !x = m u1 in
                     let !y = k x u2 in
                     y

getcharM   :: M Char
getcharM   =  getChar

putcharM   :: Char -> M () 
putcharM   =  putChar
type C a         =  (OI, a)

extract          :: C a -> a
extract (u, x)   =  let !_ = partOI u in x

duplicate        :: C a -> C (C a)
duplicate (u, x) =  let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                    (u2, (u1, x))

extend           :: (C a -> b) -> C a -> C b
extend h (u, x)  =  let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                    let !y        = h (u1, x) in
                    (u2, y)

getcharC         :: C () -> Char
getcharC (u, ()) =  getChar u

putcharC         :: C Char -> ()
putcharC (u, c)  =  putChar c u
type A b c   =  (OI -> b) -> (OI -> c)

arr          :: (b -> c) -> A b c
arr f        =  \ c' u -> let !x = c' u in f x

both         :: A b c -> A b' c' -> A (b, b') (c, c')
f' `both` g' =  \ c' u -> let !(u1:u2:u3:_) = partsOI u in
                          let !(x, x')      = c' u1 in
                          let !y            = f' (unit x) u2 in
                          let !y'           = g' (unit x') u3 in
                          (y, y')
                where
                  unit x u = let !_ = partOI u in x

getcharA     :: A () Char
getcharA     =  \ c' u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                          let !_        = c' u1 in
                          let !ch       = getChar u2 in
                          ch     

putcharA     :: A Char ()
putcharA     =  \ c' u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                          let !ch       = c' u1 in
                          let !z        = putChar ch u2 in
                          z

The OI interface can also be used to implement I/O models used in earlier versions of Haskell:

  • dialogues:
runD :: ([Response] -> [Request]) -> OI -> ()
runD d u = foldr (\ (!_) -> id) () $ yet $ \ l -> zipWith respond (d l) (partsOI u)

yet :: (a -> a) -> a
yet f = f (yet f)

respond :: Request -> OI -> Response
respond Getq     u = let !c = getChar u in Getp c
respond (Putq c) u = let !_ = putChar c u in Putp

data Request  = Getq | Putq Char
data Response = Getp Char | Putp
  • continuations:
type Answer = OI -> ()

runK :: Answer -> OI -> ()
runK a u = a u

doneK :: Answer
doneK = \ u -> let !_ = partOI u in ()

getcharK :: (Char -> Answer) -> Answer
getcharK k   = \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                      let !c        = getChar u1 in
                      let !a        = k c in
                      a u2

putcharK :: Char -> Answer -> Answer
putcharK c a = \ u -> let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                      let !_        = putChar c u1 in
                      a u2

...and even that world state-passing style used in GHC, which is also used by Clean, Single-Assignment C and as part of the I/O model used for the verification of interactive programs in CakeML, remembering that OI values can only be used once:

newtype World = W OI

getcharL :: World -> (Char, World)
getcharL (W u) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                 let !c = getChar u1 in
                 (c, W u2)

putcharL :: Char -> World -> World
putcharL c (W u) = let !(u1, u2) = partOI u in
                   let !_ = putChar c u1 in
                   W u2


See also