Skip to content

rubensf/TigerML

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Tiger Compiler

One more Tiger compiler written in SML, as an exercise for the book "Modern Compiler Implementation in ML" from Andrew W. Appel.

Usage

The following will create a tig.s, runnable on spim.

$ sml
>> CM.make "sources.cm";
>> Main.compile "file.tig";

If you want debugging info,

$ sml
>> CM.make "sources.cm";
>> Main.compileverb "file.tig" 3;

Optimizations List

We included the following optimizations:

Constant Folding

All basic operations between constants are handled at compile time rather runtime. Including

  • Plus
  • Minus
  • Multiply
  • Divide
  • And
  • Or
  • Xor
  • LShift
  • RShift
  • ARShift

Register Coalescing & Spilling

We implement coalescing and spilling. Our spilling goes through all instructions and checks for all defs and uses of a temporary - then we fetch them after every def and store them before every use. This isn't the most efficient way of spilling but it's effective in solving spilling problems. We pick spills choosing the nodes with the least amount of interferences, so that the nodes with the maximum amount of interferings go on top of stack and definitely spilled. We also add moves of $s regs on prologues and epilogues. The register allocator will get rid of those moves if there's a need for a $s register, and will get use them first if spilling requires survival of registers accross procedure calls (more efficient than fetching/storing all the time).

Bounds & nil checking

Bounds checking in array access and nill checking on record access. So far, no error message is given, but the program exits silently.

Zero constant & heuristic optimizations per architecture

We use SML pattern matching to optimize a series of instruction selection, whenever possible. For instance, we match specifically MOVE(MEM(BINOP(oper, e1, CONST i)), e2) to come out "sw e2 i(e1)"

Basic Blocks during Control Flow

We construct our flow graph using basic blocks rather than instruction by instruction for increased efficiency running control flow algorithms.

Support for String Comparison

Including =, <>, >=, >, <=, <. We made our own strcmp for that.

Optimized runtime

We compiled our own runtime with -O3, making sure all calls were external so that calling convetions would be obeyed. We also removed the "clutter" of directives not recognized by spim - that reduced our runtime to about 440 lines of instructions, favoring instruction cache. Note: Debugging stuff with -O3 somehow put a lot of instructions out of order, ie jump before updating the counter. Not sure why this happened, but it was a lot of trouble debugging the mips :( plz rewards us

Known bugs

Our bounds checking creates a CJUMP, but it creates the label at creation time rather than at usage time (as happens when unEx (Cx _)). As such, having nested accesses, as is the case in test42.tig, will crash - you try to jump to the same labels from when you created the expression, rather than new ones. I arduously tried to fix it but just couldn't on time.

About

No description, website, or topics provided.

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

No packages published