Skip to main content Accessibility help

Shifting the stage: Staging with delimited control



It is often hard to write programs that are efficient yet reusable. For example, an efficient implementation of Gaussian elimination should be specialized to the structure and known static properties of the input matrix. The most profitable optimizations, such as choosing the best pivoting or memoization, cannot be expected of even an advanced compiler because they are specific to the domain, but expressing these optimizations directly makes for ungainly source code. Instead, a promising and popular way to reconcile efficiency with reusability is for a domain expert to write code generators.

Two pillars of this approach are types and effects. Typed multilevel languages such as MetaOCaml ensure safety and early error reporting: a well-typed code generator neither goes wrong nor generates code that goes wrong. Side effects such as state and control ease correctness and expressivity: An effectful generator can resemble the textbook presentation of an algorithm, as is familiar to domain experts, yet insert let for memoization and if for bounds checking, as is necessary for efficiency. Together, types and effects enable structuring code generators as compositions of modules with well-defined interfaces, and hence scaling to large programs. However, blindly adding effects renders multilevel types unsound.

We introduce the first multilevel calculus with control effects and a sound type system. We give small-step operational semantics as well as a one-pass continuation-passing-style translation. For soundness, our calculus restricts the code generator's effects to the scope of generated binders. Even with this restriction, we can finally write efficient code generators for dynamic programming and numerical methods in direct style, like in algorithm textbooks, rather than in continuation-passing or monadic style.



Hide All
Asai, K. (2009) On typing delimited continuations: Three new solutions to the printf problem. Higher-Order Symb. Comput. 22 (3), 275291.
Asai, K. & Kameyama, Y. (2007) Polymorphic delimited continuations. In Proceedings of APLAS'07, LNCS, vol. 4807, pp. 239–254.
Balat, V., Di Cosmo, R. & Fiore, M. P. (2004) Extensional normalisation and type-directed partial evaluation for typed lambda calculus with sums. In Proceedings of Annual Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), pp. 64–76.
Bondorf, A. (1992). Improving binding times without explicit CPS-conversion. In Proceedings of LISP & Functional Programming, pp. 1–10.
Bondorf, A. & Danvy, O. (1991) Automatic autoprojection of recursive equations with global variables and abstract data types. Sci. Comput. Program. 16 (2), 151195.
Calcagno, C., Moggi, E. & Taha, W. (2000) Closed types as a simple approach to safe imperative multi-stage programming. In Proceedings of ICALP, LNCS, vol. 1853, pp. 25–36.
Calcagno, C., Moggi, E. & Taha, W. (2004) ML-like inference for classifiers. In Proceedings of ESOP, LNCS, vol. 2986, pp. 79–93.
Carette, J. (2006) Gaussian Elimination: A case study in efficient genericity with MetaOCaml. Sci. Comput. Program. 62 (1), 324 (special issue on the First MetaOCaml Workshop 2004).
Carette, J. & Kiselyov, O. (2011) Multi-stage programming with functors and monads: Eliminating abstraction overhead from generic code. Sci. Comput. Program. 76 (5), 349375.
Choi, W., Aktemur, B., Yi, K. & Tatsuta, M. (2011) Static analysis of multi-staged programs via unstaging translation. In Proceedings of POPL '11: Conference Record of the Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Ball, T. & Sagiv, M. (eds). New York: ACM Press, pp. 8192.
Cohen, A., Donadio, S., Garzarán, M. J., Herrmann, C. A., Kiselyov, O. & Padua, D. A. (2006) In search of a program generator to implement generic transformations for high-performance computing. Sci. Comput. Program. 62 (1), 2546.
Czarnecki, K., O'Donnell, J. T., Striegnitz, J. & Taha, W. (2004) DSL implementation in MetaOCaml, Template Haskell, and C++. In Proceedings of DSPG 2003, LNCS, vol. 3016, pp. 51–72.
Danvy, O. (1998) Functional unparsing. J. Funct. Program. 8 (6), 621625.
Danvy, O. & Filinski, A. (1989) A Functional Abstraction of Typed Contexts. typeTech. Rep. 89/12, institutionDIKU, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Danvy, O. & Filinski, A. (1990) Abstracting control. In Proceedings of LISP & Functional Programming, Nice, France, June 1990, pp. 151160.
Danvy, O. & Filinski, A. (1992) Representing control: A study of the CPS transformation. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 2 (4), 361391.
Davies, R. (1996) A temporal logic approach to binding-time analysis. In Proceedings of LICS, New Brunswick, New Jersey, July 27–30, pp. 184195.
Davies, R. & Pfenning, F. (2001) A modal analysis of staged computation. J. ACM 48 (3), 555604.
Dussart, D. & Thiemann, P. (1996). Imperative Functional Specialization. typeTech. Rep. WSI-96-28. institutionUniversität Tübingen.
Eckhardt, J., Kaiabachev, R., Pašalić, E., Swadi, K. N. & Taha, W. (2005) Implicitly heterogeneous multi-stage programming. In Proceedings of GPCE, LNCS, vol. 3676, pp. 275–292.
Elliott, C. (2004) Programming graphics processors functionally. In Proceedings of Haskell Workshop, Snowbird, UT, USA, September 22, pp. 4556.
Felleisen, M. (1991) On the expressive power of programming languages. Sci. Comput. Program. 17 (1–3), 3575.
Felleisen, M., Friedman, D. P., Kohlbecker, E. E. & Duba, B. F.. (1986) Reasoning with continuations. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, USA, June 16–18, pp. 131141.
Filinski, A. (1994) Representing monads. In Proceedings of POPL, Portland, Oregon, USA, January 17–21, pp. 446457.
Fluet, M. & Morrisett, J. G. (2006) Monadic regions. J. Funct. Program. 16 (4–5), 485545.
Frigo, M. & Johnson, S. G. (2005) The design and implementation of FFTW3. Proc. IEEE 93 (2), 216231.
Ganz, S. E. (2006). Encapsulation of State with Monad Transformers. Ph.D. thesis, Computer Science Department, Indiana University.
Gomard, C. K. & Jones, N. D. (1991) A partial evaluator for the untyped lambda calculus. J. Funct. Program. 1 (1), 2169.
Hammond, K. & Michaelson, G. (2003) Hume: A domain-specific language for real-time embedded systems. In Proceedings of GPCE, LNCS, vol. 2830, pp. 37–56.
Igarashi, A. & Iwaki, M. (2007) Deriving compilers and virtual machines for a multi-level language. In Proceedings of APLAS, LNCS, vol. 4807, pp. 206–221.
Kagawa, K. (2001) Monadic encapsulation with stack of regions. In Proceedings of FLOPS, LNCS, vol. 2024, pp. 264–279.
Kameyama, Y., Kiselyov, O. & Shan, C.-c. (2008) Closing the stage: From staged code to typed closures. In Proceedings of PEPM, San Francisco, CA, USA, pp. 147157.
Kameyama, Y., Kiselyov, O. & Shan, C.-c. (2009) Shifting the stage: Staging with delimited control. In Proceedings of PEPM. New York: ACM Press, pp. 111120.
Kameyama, Y., Kiselyov, O. & Shan, C.-c. (2010) Mechanizing multilevel metatheory with control effects. In Proceedings of 5th ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Mechanizing Metatheory. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Kamin, S. (1996) Standard ML as a meta-programming language. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Kiselyov, O. (2010) Delimited control in OCaml, abstractly and concretely: System description. In Proceedings of FLOPS, LNCS, vol. 6009, pp. 304–320. Extended version to appear in Theor. Comput. Sci.
Kiselyov, O., Shan, C.-c. & Sabry, A. (2006) Delimited dynamic binding. In Proceedings of ICFP, Portland, OR, USA, pp. 2637.
Kiselyov, O. & Taha, W. (2005) Relating FFTW and split-radix. In Proceedings of ICESS, LNCS, vol. 3605, pp. 488–493.
Lawall, J. L. & Danvy, O. (1994) Continuation-based partial evaluation. In Proceedings of LISP & Functional Programming, Austin, TX, USA, August 5–8, pp. 227238.
Lengauer, C. & Taha, W. (eds). (2006) Special issue on the 1st MetaOCaml workshop (2004), Sci. Comput. Program. 62 (1).
Leone, M. & Lee, P. (1998) Dynamic specialization in the Fabius system. ACM Comput. Surv, 30(3es), article 23:123:6.
Leroy, X. & Pessaux, F. (2000) Type-based analysis of uncaught exceptions. ACM Tran. Prog. Lang. Syst. 22 (2), 340377.
Masuko, M. & Asai, K. (2009) Direct implementation of shift and reset in the MinCaml compiler. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on ML. New York: ACM Press, pp. 4960.
McAdam, B. J. (2001) Y in practical programs. Proceedings of Workshop on Fixed Points in Computer Science. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
MetaOCaml, . (2006) MetaOCaml. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Michie, D. (1968) “Memo” functions and machine learning. Nature 218: 1922.
Minsky, Y. (2008) Bind without tears. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Moreau, L. (1998) A syntactic theory of dynamic binding. Higher-Order Symb. Comput. 11 (3), 233279.
Morrisett, J. G. (1993) Refining first-class stores. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on State in Programming Languages, pp. 73–87.
Nielson, F. & Nielson, H. R. (1988) Automatic binding time analysis for a typed λ-calculus. In Proceedings of POPL, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 98106.
Parigot, M. (1992) λμ-calculus: An algorithmic interpretation of classical natural deduction. In Proceedings of LPAR, LNAI, vol. 624, pp. 190–201.
Pašalić, E., Taha, W. & Sheard, T. (2002) Tagless staged interpreters for typed languages. In Proceedings of ICFP, pp. 157–166.
Peyton Jones, S. L. (2003) The Haskell 98 language and libraries. J. Funct. Program. 13 (1), 1255.
Püschel, M., Moura, J. M. F., Johnson, J., Padua, D., Veloso, M., Singer, B. W., Xiong, J., Franchetti, F., Gačić, A., Voronenko, Y., Chen, K., Johnson, R. W. & Rizzolo, N. (2005) SPIRAL: Code generation for DSP transforms. Proc. IEEE 93 (2), 232275.
Sørensen, M. H. B., Glück, R. & Jones, N. D. (1994) Towards unifying deforestation, supercompilation, partial evaluation, and generalized partial computation. In Proceedings of ESOP, LNCS, vol. 788, pp. 485–500.
Sumii, E. and Kobayashi, N. (2001) A hybrid approach to online and offline partial evaluation. Higher-Order Symb. Comput. 14 (2–3), 101142.
Swadi, K., Taha, W. & Kiselyov, O. (2005) Dynamic programming benchmark. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Swadi, K., Taha, W., Kiselyov, O. & Pašalić, E. (2006) A monadic approach for avoiding code duplication when staging memoized functions. In Proceedings of PEPM, Charleston, SC, USA, January 9–10, pp. 160169.
Taha, W. (2000). A sound reduction semantics for untyped CBN multi-stage computation. In Proceedings of PEPM, Boston, MA, USA, pp. 3443.
Taha, W. (2005) Resource-aware programming. In Proceedings of ICESS, LNCS, vol. 3605, pp. 38–43.
Taha, W. & Nielsen, M. F. (2003) Environment classifiers. In Proceedings of POPL, New Orleans, LA, USA, January 15–17, pp. 2637.
Talpin, J.-P. & Jouvelot, P. (1992) Polymorphic type, region and effect inference. J. Funct. Program. 2 (3), 245271.
Thielecke, H. (2003) From control effects to typed continuation passing. In Proceedings of POPL, New Orleans, LA, USA, January 15–17, pp. 139149.
Thiemann, P. (1999) Combinators for program generation. J. Funct. Program. 9 (5), 483525.
Thiemann, P. & Dussart, D. (1999) Partial evaluation for higher-order languages with state. Available at: Accessed 8 November 2011.
Tofte, M., Birkedal, L., Elsman, M. & Hallenberg, N. (2004) A retrospective on region-based memory management. Higher-Order Symb. Comput. 17 (3), 245265.
Wadler, P. L. (1992) Comprehending monads. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 2 (4), 461493.
Whaley, R. C. & Petitet, A. (2005) Minimizing development and maintenance costs in supporting persistently optimized BLAS. Softw. Pract. Exp. 35 (2), 101121.
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Kameyama Supplementary Material
Kameyama Supplementary Material

 Unknown (61 KB)
61 KB

Shifting the stage: Staging with delimited control



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

Shifting the stage: Staging with delimited control

Submit a response


No Discussions have been published for this article.


Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *