MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036777573 · doi:10.1145/2661103.2661108

Efficient compilation of tail calls and continuations to JavaScript

2012· article· en· W2036777573 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric Thivierge, Marc Feeley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJavaScriptComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)CompilerProgramming languageOperating systemSet (abstract data type)Parallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an approach for compiling Scheme's tail calls and first-class continuations to JavaScript, a dynamic language without those features. Our approach is based on the use of a simple custom virtual machine intermediate representation that is translated to JavaScript. We compare this approach, which is used by the Gambit-JS compiler, to the Replay-C algorithm, used by Scheme2JS (a derivative of Bigloo), and Cheney on the MTA, used by Spock (a derivative of Chicken). We analyse the performance of the three systems with a set of benchmark programs on recent versions of four popular JavaScript VMs (V8, SpiderMonkey, Nitro and Chakra). On the benchmark programs, all systems perform best when executed with V8 and our approach is consistently faster than the others on all VMs. For some VMs and benchmarks our approach is moderately faster than the others (below a factor of 2), but in some cases there is a very large performance gap (with Nitro there is a slowdown of up to 3 orders of magnitude for Scheme2JS, and up to 2 orders of magnitude for Spock).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207