Vimagi on Erlang2facebook

Erlang2facebook continues to gain users. The lastest is Yariv’s Vimagi Paint! Ignore my scribblings, and give it a whirl. There’s some really amazing work up there. (And, nice job, Yariv!)

For anyone else playing with the library, you might want to sync with the repository. Yariv’s prodding caught a couple of bugs, whose fixes were committed a few days ago.


Disclaimer: The following is a diversion from BeerRiot. To all Rioters waiting on new features, I apologize. I can only claim temporary insanity due to cold.

I ran across two interesting Erlang posts recently. The first was to the Trapexit help form, where someone was attempting to implement a Brainfuck interpreter in Erlang, as a way of learning the language. I didn’t understand the question being asked, so I decided to give it a go myself, to see if I ran into a similar question.

A little while later, this is the implementation I had:


run(Program) ->
    run([], Program, [], 0, []).

run(Left, [$>|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    case RP of
	[D|Rest] -> run([$>|Left], Right, [Data|LP], D, Rest);
	[]       -> run([$>|Left], Right, [Data|LP], 0, [])
run(Left, [$<|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    case LP of
	[D|Rest] -> run([$<|Left], Right, Rest, D, [Data|RP]);
	[]       -> run([$<|Left], Right, [], 0, [Data|RP])
run(Left, [$+|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    run([$+|Left], Right, LP, Data+1, RP);
run(Left, [$-|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    run([$-|Left], Right, LP, Data-1, RP);
run(Left, [$.|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    run([$.|Left], Right, LP, Data, RP);
run(Left, [$,|Right], LP, _, RP) ->
    Data = io:get_chars([], 1),
    run([$,|Left], Right, LP, Data, RP);
run(Left, [91|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    if Data == 0 ->
	    {NewLeft, NewRight} = pass_match(91, 93, [91|Left], Right),
	    run(NewLeft, NewRight, LP, Data, RP);
       true ->
	    run([91|Left], Right, LP, Data, RP)
run(Left, [93|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    if Data /= 0 ->
	    {[91|NewRight], NewLeft} = pass_match(93, 91, [93|Right], Left),
	    run([91|NewLeft], NewRight, LP, Data, RP);
       true ->
	    run([93|Left], Right, LP, Data, RP)
run(Left, [X|Right], LP, Data, RP) ->
    run([X|Left], Right, LP, Data, RP);
run(_, [], _, Data, _) ->

pass_match(This, Match, Accum, Source) ->
    pass_match(This, Match, Accum, Source, 0).
pass_match(_, Match, Accum, [Match|Source], 0) ->
    {[Match|Accum], Source};
pass_match(This, Match, Accum, [Match|Source], Depth) ->
    pass_match(This, Match, [Match|Accum], Source, Depth-1);
pass_match(This, Match, Accum, [This|Source], Depth) ->
    pass_match(This, Match, [This|Accum], Source, Depth+1);
pass_match(This, Match, Accum, [X|Source], Depth) ->
    pass_match(This, Match, [X|Accum], Source, Depth).

Basically, a list for what is to the left of the current execution point, and another for what is to the right, as well as a list each for what is to the left and right of the current data point. Just tail-recurse through the right list (with a little extra jumping for the loop operators), pattern matching the opcode at the head of the right program list. Run the program by calling bf:run(Program) where Program is just a list of characters (including Brainfuck symbols if you want any result other than 0). For example, the following code will print out “Hello World” (found on the Wikipedia page).

[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-] The initial loop to set up useful values in the array
>++.                             Print 'H'
>+.                              Print 'e'
+++++++.                         Print 'l'
.                                Print 'l'
+++.                             Print 'o'
>++.                             Print ' '
<<+++++++++++++++.               Print 'W'
>.                               Print 'o'
+++.                             Print 'r'
------.                          Print 'l'
--------.                        Print 'd'
>+.                              Print '!'
>.                               Print newline").

The second post I happened across was someone noticing the alternative way to make Erlang atoms (by enclosing characters in single quotes). Commenters were unhappy that they had never found a good use for functions named using these atoms.

Well, guess where that thought took me:


-export(['>'/2, '<'/2, '+'/2, '-'/2, '.'/2, ','/2, '['/2, ']'/2, stop/2]).

-record(tape, {left=[], current=0, right=[]}).

function_list() ->
    lists:foldl(fun({Atom, _}, Funs) ->
			case atom_to_list(Atom) of
			    [Char] -> [{Char, Atom}|Funs];
			    _ -> Funs
		end, [], proplists:get_value(exports, bf2:module_info())).

run(Program) ->
    Funs = function_list(),
    Atoms = lists:foldl(fun(C, T) ->
				case proplists:get_value(C, Funs) of
				    undefined -> T;
				    A -> [A | T]
			end, [], Program),
    [Current|Rest] = lists:reverse([stop|Atoms]),
    bf2:Current(#tape{current=Current, right=Rest}, #tape{}).

advance(Program, Data) ->
    [Next|Rest] = Program#tape.right,
    bf2:Next(#tape{left = [Program#tape.current | Program#tape.left],
		      current = Next,
		      right = Rest},

stop(_, #tape{current=Value}) ->

'>'(Program, Data) ->
    case Data#tape.right of
	[X|R] -> NewPoint = X, NewRight = R;
	_ -> NewPoint = 0, NewRight = []
    advance(Program, #tape{left = [Data#tape.current | Data#tape.left],
			   current = NewPoint, right = NewRight}).

'<'(Program, Data) ->
    case Data#tape.left of
	[X|L] -> NewPoint = X, NewLeft = L;
	_ -> NewPoint = 0, NewLeft = []
    advance(Program, #tape{right = [Data#tape.current | Data#tape.right],
			   current = NewPoint, left = NewLeft}).

'+'(Program, Data) ->
    advance(Program, Data#tape{current = Data#tape.current + 1}).

'-'(Program, Data) ->
    advance(Program, Data#tape{current = Data#tape.current - 1}).

'.'(Program, Data) ->
    advance(Program, Data).

','(Program, Data) ->
    In = io:get_chars([], 1),
    advance(Program, Data#tape{current = In}).

'['(Program, Data) ->
    if Data#tape.current /= 0 ->
	    advance(Program, Data);
       true ->
	    {Left, Right} = skip('[', ']',
	    advance(#tape{left=Left, current=']', right=Right}, Data)

']'(Program, Data) ->
    if Data#tape.current == 0 ->
	    advance(Program, Data);
       true ->
	    {Right, Left} = skip(']', '[',
	    advance(#tape{left=Left, current='[', right=Right}, Data)

skip(Up, Down, Acc, Src) -> skip(Up, Down, [Up|Acc], Src, 0).

skip( _, Down, Acc, [Down|Src], 0) -> {Acc, Src};
skip(Up, Down, Acc, [Down|Src], N) -> skip(Up, Down, [Down|Acc], Src, N-1);
skip(Up, Down, Acc, [Up|Src], N)   -> skip(Up, Down, [Up|Acc], Src, N+1);
skip(Up, Down, Acc, [X|Src], N)    -> skip(Up, Down, [X|Acc], Src, N).

Basically, create a function named for each Brainfuck operator. Then, convert all of the valid Brainfuck operators in the program into atoms, and use them to call the functions sharing their names. Run it just like the earlier example, bf2:run(Program).

Now, I’m not going to call the first implementation ugly. In fact, I think it’s a fair example of walking a list, doing different things depending on the value of the head of the list. But, I have to say that The second version does read a bit nicer, in some respects. (I also tried using the tape record in the first example, but I thought it made things worse.)

Yeah, okay, Brainfuck clearly still isn’t a great use for quirky-atom function names, but perhaps it represents some problem space that can make good use of them?

Anyone have a better neat trick – for either Brainfuck interpretation or funky-atom function names?

P.S. My apologies for not posting an answer to Alboin (the Trapexit poster). I can’t remember my login details for Trapexit. 😛

Disclaimer 2: WordPress really doesn’t like dealing with so many <s and >s. I think I got everything, but if something doesn’t work, that’s probably the culprit.

Denormalization, Processes

If you read the news, you’ll know that tuneups are happening behind the scenes of BeerRiot. If you came to this blog after reading that story, you’re wondering what, exactly, they are.

If I’m not feeling particularly communication-challenged, I’ll be able to explain them to you. 😉

The first tuneup is one every webmaster has heard of: denormalization. I had been using a view to select data from three tables with one call. The performance drag of that query was serious enough, though, that I’ve decided to complicate things a bit and copy the extra bits of data I need from the other tables into the main one for the query.

The speed gain is great, and, somewhat strangely, the denormalization actually cleaned up a bunch of my code. ErlyDB lacks a “one-to-one” relation, so it was impossible for me to say “each record in this view is really just a record in this other table with some extra data.” That made for a bit of hackery swinging from one type to another. Without that extra table, I think the code reads more clearly.

(Disclaimer: I’m far from being an relational database master, so it’s likely that there is a much better way to express everything I’m doing. But, I’m happy to be making what seems to be forward progress.)

The other main change is more Erlang-centric. Until now, I had been tracking sessions using a customization of the Yaws recommended session server. This is basically a central process that stores opaque data associated with an id string. Whenever your app gets a request, it pulls the cookie value out and checks with this central process to find out if there is any opaque data associated with this key. It works (quite well, in fact), but it seems like a bit of a bottle neck.

So, I’ve decided that there’s a more Erlangy way to do things. What BeerRiot is doing now is starting up a new process for each session, and saving that process id in a client cookie. Then, whenever a request comes in, if it has a cookie with a PID, we can try to contact that session’s handling process directly. No central service required.

It turns out that there’s loads of benefits to having this session hanging around beyond relieving the central service bottleneck. It can cache data, smartly (i.e. listen for updates, etc.). It’s a natural place to run background processes (like propagating live changes to durable storage). I see other potential uses, but since I haven’t tested them yet, I’ll hold my tongue to avoid getting too many hopes up. 😉

For Facebook developers: This process-session system wasn’t possible until just a few weeks ago, when Facebook started supporting cookies on the canvas page. Unfortunately, they only support them for canvas requests, and not for their “mock ajax.” For mock ajax, I’ve decided to just encode the cookie values in post parameters. It works (and it’s no more inconsistent than the rest of the Facebook Developer experience).

Update 2.Jan 18:52 EDT: If you spent any part of today poking at BeerRiot to see how the speed-ups turned out, you were probably rather dissatisfied. I just figured out that I didn’t fully rollout the update. 😛 It’s there now, and I think you’ll be much more impressed.