Zulip Chat Archive

Stream: general

Topic: Various VM questions

Neil Strickland (Dec 06 2018 at 11:37):

I have been working on several different approaches to partitions of finite sets and other finite combinatorial structures. I would like to do things in such a way that the VM can compute with examples that are moderately large. For this I would like to understand better how the VM works and what it can do. I have not managed to find any relevant documentation, but I have looked a little bit at the VM-related source code.

  • Is there any documentation that I have not found?
  • Is there a way to get Lean to print information about what the VM can do with a given definition?
  • Any comments or corrections on the following?
  • It seems best to do serious computation with partitions of fin n, and then set things up so that one can deal with partitions of a general fintype by using an equivalence with fin n.
  • It looks like the VM will deal efficiently with fin n but not with fin2 n. On the other hand, if you were willing to add stuff to the lean core, it looks like you could easily implement an efficient VM version of fin2.
  • It looks like it is probably efficient to work with the quotient of a simple type by a complicated equivalence relation, because the complexity is all hidden in Props which are erased by the VM.
  • It looks like the VM cannot handle fin n -> X efficiently, but should be happy with list X or array n X
  • The VM has support for rb_map. It is not clear to me whether this only comes into play if you use rb_map explicitly, or whether it some how gets used for other kinds of structures.

Bryan Gin-ge Chen (Dec 06 2018 at 16:56):

This doesn't address any of your questions about the VM, but regarding partitions of finite sets, @Mario Carneiro suggested a more efficient recursive approach to enumeration than the one I took in the tutorial branch. Perhaps this is already something you've done though.

Mario Carneiro (Dec 06 2018 at 17:10):

1. There isn't too much documentation about the VM, although for basic use it's quite simple: just use #eval and the VM runs any lean function.
2. Lean can evaluate any definition that is not marked noncomputable (which is a really obvious and required marking on any definition).
3. ...
4. That's debatable. Working over arbitrary types also means working parametrically in the data representation, abstracting away the details like the reason why a type is finite. What representation is "best" depends on the application.
5. This is true. fin2 n will be a linked list of pointers, and fin n will be a number stored as a 32 bit integer if it is small enough. The recommended approach here is to put together VM primitive types to get the data representation you would like - a type describes its data representation, so if you want a different representation you need a different type.
6. This is true. A quotient is represented using the underlying type, with the relation appearing nowhere. It is a zero cost abstraction. However, depending on what you want to do with the relation this may not be a good thing. For example you can't easily enumerate the elements of a quotient type unless you know something about the relation. It is a tool in the box, but its usefulness depends on the application.
7. This is also application dependent. A fin n -> X is a function that takes a number and returns a value in X. A list X is a linked list of values of type X. An array n X is a literal array in memory whose elements have type X. They all have their own performance characteristics, and it isn't too hard to guess what they are, roughly.
8. The VM has support for several meta data structures beyond rb_map, such as tactic_state, expr, environment and so on. There is a non-meta version of rb_map, called rbmap, which has no special support. I think the sense is that it wasn't really necessary to implement rb_map as a C data structure when lean can do it well enough. Not counting meta data structures, the only types/functions with native support are nat, int, array and quot (maybe I'm forgetting something but I'm sure others will point it out).

Scott Morrison (Dec 06 2018 at 20:31):

... and perhaps in this context it's worth mentioning that everything will likely be different when Lean 4 arrives :four_leaf_clover: .

Last updated: Dec 20 2023 at 11:08 UTC