Mark S. Miller
erights at google.com
Tue Jan 13 09:14:56 PST 2015
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at annevk.nl> wrote:
> implementation is tied to a realm and therefore each realm will have
> its own implementation. Contrast this with a C++ implementation of the
> same feature that can be shared across many realms. The C++
> implementation is much more efficient.
> If we want to get further with turning the web platform into a giant
> Has anyone been thinking about how to do this and what changes it
> loses out due to lack of efficiency.
> PS: Alternative explanation available here:
beyond ES5 strict mode, ES6 modules, and the inter-realm (aka "global")
Symbol registry. But some future changes under discussion may help, such as
extensible value types, if done right.
First, an impractical straw man ("straw man" in the negative sense that is)
that would have worked even in ES3 days, just to make a point:
When the same url-full-path.js file is loaded multiple times to populate
multiple realms, the browser cache hopefully typically hits, avoiding
actually loading the source code over the web multiple times. Such
cacheable urls might, for examples, be urls on a CDN.
The string representing this source code can then of course be shared
across realms, and even between workers sharing an address space. With
enough cleverness, large strings can even be shared between address spaces.
All the code generation derived from this string can be re-derived from
this string, so all that generated code can be in a memory-budget limited
cache. As long as the cache is big enough for the working set of code that
needs to be run, a finite cache + some per-realm bookkeeping can handle an
unbounded number of realms loading the same sources.
The per-realm bookkeeping has to preserve the correspondence of the
identity and state of function objects to the code describing their
behavior. The code part of these function objects at a minimum can refer to
its source string and the position in that source string of its own source
code. Regarding remaining identity and state, all this is still per realm
with no further economizing, but this is true for builtin (C++, Rust, etc)
functions as well.
The above scenario "solves" the memory consumption problem, but at a cost
of regenerating the code from string source on a generated-code-cache-miss.
Much of the time spent regenerating from string sources is lexing and
parsing, which are context independent even in ES3, so we can cache some
immutable representation of the parsed form rather than the source strings,
probably taking more space, but reducing the regeneration time. Next is
scope analysis, which is stable up to free variables (typically globals) in
ES5 strict mode code, so this can be cached inter-realm as well.
ES6 modules brings even more stability of scope analysis, given that our
cache-hit test takes transitive imports into account as well.
The inter-realm Symbol registry gives us an inter-realm namespace that we
can use for reliable runtime inter-realm brand testing, public slot naming,
and duck typing.
Note that all modern JS engines JIT compile to generate the actual machine
code, which they invalidate when assumptions change, so all actual machine
code is in an invalidate-able cache that cannot be shared between realms.
This is an irreducible cost compared to a builtin (C++, Rust, etc)
implementation. The point of the inter-realm cache is to reduce the time
taken to repopulate this unsharable part. Both caches can be memory-budget
Unfortunately, browser caches do not test cache hits on a sound basis.
Really, we need soundly cacheable code URLs to carry a cryptographic hash
in the URL, where the browser only considers the loaded content to be valid
if its hash matches. Then, a browser can cache and reuse soundly based on
hash match. <https://www.tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs> refers to such
URLs as "self-authenticating designators". See also the threads rooted at
and the message at
on hashing the transitive closure on import dependencies, rather than
hashing each module independently. In retrospect, I expect this further
logic to be past the point of diminishing returns. But none of this has
been subjected to any measurements.
A political problem arises in the first step -- the browser cache. No one
expects a browser to provide an affordance to remove its C++ builtins,
forcing them (if there were such an option) to be reloaded over the web. By
contrast, all browsers provide, and must provide, an affordance to clear
their caches. Under current assumptions, this forces all the externally
loaded code to be reloaded the next time they are fetched. The extensible
web agenda needs to come to grips with this political problem. I don't know
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss