I see. So you're current implementation is not push, is it? The original pull implementation in Fran also used Maybe events, but that was considered inefficient. How is Reactive Banana better then Fran then?

--Bartosz

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Heinrich Apfelmus <apfelmus@quantentunnel.de> wrote:
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
Thanks, Heinrich. I looked at the examples and at the references you
provided. I understand the semantic model, so I guess I'm mostly trying to
understand the implementation.

Ok. As I mentioned, if you just want to use the library there is no need to understand the implementation.


Conal's paper was mostly about refining data
structures in order to provide better implementation. It's all beautiful up
to the point where he introduces the unamb hack. How did you manage to work
around this problem and implement event merging efficiently?

Essentially, Conal implements events as

   type Event a = [(Time,a)]

The trouble is that when merging events, this representation forces you to wait for both events. In other words, the pattern match

   union ((t1,x1):e1) ((t2,x2):e2) = ...

needs to know the times of occurrences of both events before it can return the earlier one. The trouble is that the  merge  function should have returned the earlier one right away, before knowing exactly when the later one happens. The purpose of the  unamb  hack is circumvent that problem.


Reactive-banana's very simple solution to this problem is to represent events as

   type Event a = [(Time, Maybe a)]

and impose the additional invariant that all events in your program are "synchronized", in the sense that they indicate their occurrences at the same times^1. If they don't occur at that time, they use  Nothing . Then, you can implement  merge  simply as

   union ((t1,x1):e1) ((t2,x2):e2) = -- we always have  t1 = t2
       (t1, combine x1 x2) : union e1 e2
       where
       combine (Just x) Nothing  = Just x   -- only left occurs
       combine Nothing  (Just y) = Just y   -- only right occurs
       combine (Just x) (Just y) = Just x   -- simultaneous occurrence
       combine Nothing  Nothing  = Nothing  -- neither occurs

Since the times are given globally, we can also remove them and obtain

   type Event a = [Maybe a]

This is how  Reactive.Banana.Model  does it.


Of course, keeping track of a lot of  Nothing  is something that can be optimized. The optimization to apply here is to transform the implementation into a push-driven style. I haven't published the details yet, but some design notes can be found here.

http://apfelmus.nfshost.com/blog/2011/04/24-frp-push-driven-sharing.html


^1: Note that the times do not need to follow a uniform time step.



Best regards,
Heinrich Apfelmus

--
http://apfelmus.nfshost.com


_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haskell-cafe" group.
To post to this group, send email to haskell-cafe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to haskell-cafe+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haskell-cafe?hl=en.




--
[:Bartosz:]