Merge pull request #73 from kyouko-taiga/main

kyouko-taiga · web-flow · commit ee21ff46ea34 · 2024-08-19T08:41:59.000+02:00
SIP-59 - Multiple assignments
diff --git a/content/multiple-assignments.md b/content/multiple-assignments.md
@@ -0,0 +1,331 @@
+---
+layout: sip
+permalink: /sips/:title.html
+stage: implementation
+status: waiting-for-implementation
+presip-thread: https://contributors.scala-lang.org/t/pre-sip-multiple-assignments/6425
+title: SIP-59 - Multiple Assignments
+---
+
+**By: Dimi Racordon**
+
+## History
+
+| Date          | Version            |
+|---------------|--------------------|
+| Jan 17th 2024 | Initial Draft      |
+
+## Summary
+
+This proposal discusses the syntax and semantics of a construct to assign multiple variables with a single expression.
+This feature would simplify the implementation of operations expressed in terms of relationships between multiple variables, such as [`std::swap`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/swap) in C++.
+
+## Motivation
+
+It happens that one has to assign multiple variables "at once" in an algorithm.
+For example, let's consider the Fibonacci sequence:
+
+```scala
+class FibonacciIterator() extends Iterator[Int]:
+
+  private var a: Int = 0
+  private var b: Int = 1
+
+  def hasNext = true
+  def next() =
+    val r = a
+    val n = a + b
+    a = b
+    b = n
+    r
+```
+
+The same iterator could be rewritten more concisely if we could assign multiple variables at once.
+For example, we can write the following in Swift:
+
+```swift
+struct FibonacciIterator: IteratorProtocol {
+
+  private var a: Int = 0
+  private var b: Int = 1
+  init() {}
+
+  mutating func next() -> Int? {
+    defer { (a, b) = (b, a + b) }
+    return a
+  }
+
+}
+```
+
+Though the differences may seem frivolous at first glance, they are in fact important.
+If we look at a formal definition of the Fibonacci sequence (e.g., on [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_sequence)), we might see something like:
+
+> The Fibonacci sequence is given by *F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n+1)* where *F(0) = 0* and *F(1) = 1*.
+
+Although this declarative description says nothing about an evaluation order, it becomes a concern in our Scala implementation as we must encode the relationship into multiple operational steps.
+This decomposition offers opportunities to get things wrong:
+
+```scala
+def next() =
+  val r = a
+  a = b
+  b = a + b // invalid semantics, the value of `a` changed "too early"
+  r
+```
+
+In contrast, our Swift implementation can remain closer to the formal definition and is therefore more legible and less error-prone.
+
+Multiple assignments show up in many general-purpose algorithms (e.g., insertion sort, partition, min-max element, ...).
+But perhaps the most fundamental one is `swap`, which consists of exchanging two values.
+
+We often swap values that are stored in some collection.
+In this particular case, all is well in Scala because we can ask the collection to swap elements at given positions:
+
+```scala
+extension [T](self: mutable.ArrayBuffer[T])
+  def swapAt(i: Int, j: Int) =
+    val t = self(i)
+    self(i) = self(j)
+    self(j) = t
+
+val a = mutable.ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
+a.swapAt(0, 2)
+println(a) // ArrayBuffer(3, 2, 1)
+```
+
+Sadly, one can't implement a generic swap method that wouldn't rely on the ability to index a container.
+The only way to express this operation in Scala is to "inline" the pattern implemented by `swapAt` every time we need to swap two values.
+
+Having to rewrite this boilerplate is unfortunate.
+Here is an example in a realistic algorithm:
+
+```scala
+extension [T](self: Seq[T])(using Ordering[T])
+  def minMaxElements: Option[(T, T)] =
+    import math.Ordering.Implicits.infixOrderingOps
+
+    // Return None for collections smaller than 2 elements.
+    var i = self.iterator
+    if (!i.hasNext) { return None }
+    var l = i.next()
+    if (!i.hasNext) { return None }
+    var h = i.next()
+
+    // Confirm the initial bounds.
+    if (h < l) { val t = l; l = h; h = l }
+
+    // Process the remaining elements.
+    def loop(): Option[(T, T)] =
+      if (i.hasNext) {
+        val n = i.next()
+        if (n < l) { l = n } else if (n > h) { h = n }
+        loop()
+      } else {
+        Some((l, h))
+      }
+    loop()
+```
+
+*Note: implementation shamelessly copied from [swift-algorithms](https://github.com/apple/swift-algorithms/blob/main/Sources/Algorithms/MinMax.swift).*
+
+The swap occurs in the middle of the method with the sequence of expressions `val t = l; l = h; h = l`.
+To borrow from the words of Edgar Dijskstra [1, Chapter 11]:
+
+> [that] is combersome and ugly compared with the [multiple] assignment.
+
+While `swap` is a very common operation, it's only an instance of a more general class of operations that are expressed in terms of relationships between multiple variables.
+The definition of the Fibonacci sequence is another example.
+
+## Proposed solution
+
+The proposed solution is to add a language construct to assign multiple variables in a single expression.
+Using this construct, swapping two values can be written as follows:
+
+```scala
+var a = 2
+var b = 4
+(a, b) = (b, a)
+println(s"$a$b") // 42
+```
+
+The above Fibonacci iterator can be rewritten as follows:
+
+```scala
+class FibonacciIterator() extends Iterator[Int]:
+
+  private var a: Int = 0
+  private var b: Int = 1
+
+  def hasNext = true
+  def next() =
+    val r = a
+    (a, b) = (b, a + b)
+    r
+```
+
+Multiple assignments also alleviate the need for a swap method on collections, as the same idiomatic pattern can be reused to exchange elements at given indices:
+
+```scala
+val a = mutable.ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
+(a(0), a(2)) = (a(2), a(0))
+println(a) // ArrayBuffer(3, 2, 1)
+```
+
+### Specification
+
+A multiple assignment is an expression of the form `AssignTarget ‘=’ Expr` where:
+
+```
+AssignTarget ::= ‘(’ AssignTargetNode {‘,’ AssignTargetNode} ‘)’
+AssignTargetNode ::= Expr | AssignTarget
+```
+
+An assignment target describes a structural pattern that can only be matched by a compatible composition of tuples.
+For example, the following program is legal.
+
+```scala
+def f: (Boolean, Int) = (true, 42)
+val a = mutable.ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
+def b = a
+var x = false
+
+(x, a(0)) = (false, 1337)
+(x, a(1)) = f
+((x, a(1)), b(2)) = (f, 9000)
+(x) = Tuple1(false)
+```
+
+A mismatch between the structure of a multiple assignment's target and the result of its RHS is a type error.
+It cannot be detected during parsing because at this stage the compiler would not be able to determine the shape of an arbitrary expression's result.
+For example, all multiple assignments in the following program are ill-typed:
+
+```scala
+def f: (Boolean, Int) = (true, 42)
+val a = mutable.ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
+def b = a
+var x = false
+
+(a(1), x) = f               // type mismatch
+(x, a(1), b(2)) = (f, 9000) // structural mismatch
+(x) = false                 // structural mismatch
+(x) = (1, 2)                // structural mismatch
+```
+
+Likewise, `(x) = Tuple1(false)` is _not_ equivalent to `x = Tuple1(false)`.
+The former is a multiple assignment while the latter is a regular assignment, as described by the [current grammar](https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/reference/syntax.html) (see `Expr1`).
+Though this distinction is subtle, multiple assignments involving unary tuples should be rare.
+
+The operational semantics of multiple assignments (aka concurrent assignments) have been studied extensively in scienific literature (e.g., [1, 2]).
+A first intuition is that the most desirable semantics can be achieved by fully evaluating the RHS of the assignment before assigning any expression in the LHS [1].
+However, additional considerations must be given w.r.t. the independence of the variables on the LHS to guarantee deterministic results.
+For example, consider the following expression:
+
+```scala
+(x, x) = (1, 2)
+```
+
+While one may conclude that such an expression should be an error [1], it is in general difficult to guarantee value independence in a language with pervasive reference semantics.
+Further, it is desirable to write expressions of the form `(a(0), a(2)) = (a(2), a(0))`, as shown in the previous section.
+Another complication is that multiple assignments should uphold the general left-to-right evaluation semantics of the Scala language.
+For example, `a.b = c` requires `a` to be evaluated _before_ `c`.
+
+Note that regular assignments desugar to function calls (e.g., `a(b) = c` is sugar for `a.update(b, c)`).
+One property of these desugarings is always the last expression being evaluated before the method performing the assignment is called.
+Given this observation, we address the abovementioned issues by defining the following algorithm:
+
+1. Traverse the LHS structure in inorder and for each leaf:
+    - Evaluate each outermost subexpression to its value
+    - Form a closure capturing these values and accepting a single argument to perform the desugared assignment
+    - Associate that closure to the leaf
+2. Compute the value of the RHS, which forms a tree
+3. Traverse the LHS and RHS structures pairwise in inorder and for each leaf:
+    - Apply the closure formerly associated to the LHS on RHS value
+
+For instance, consider the following definitions.
+
+```scala
+def f: (Boolean, Int) = (true, 42)
+val a = mutable.ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
+def b = a
+var x = false
+```
+
+The evaluation of the expression `((x, a(a(0))), b(2)) = (f, 9000)` is as follows:
+
+1. form a closure `f0 = (rhs) => x_=(rhs)`
+2. evaluate `a(0)`; result is `1`
+3. form a closure `f1 = (rhs) => a.update(1, rhs)`
+4. evaluate `b`; result is `a`
+5. evaluate `2`
+6. form a closure `f2 = (rhs) => a.update(2, rhs)`
+7. evaluate `(f, 9000)`; result is `((true, 42), 9000)`
+8. evaluate `f0(true)`
+9. evaluate `f1(42)`
+10. evaluate `f2(9000)`
+
+After the assignment, `x == true` and `a == List(1, 42, 9000)`.
+
+The compiler is allowed to ignore this procedure and generate different code for optimization purposes as long as it can guarantee that such a change is not observable.
+For example, given two local variables `x` and `y`, their assignments in `(x, y) = (1, 2)` can be reordered or even performed in parallel.
+
+### Compatibility
+
+This proposal is purely additive and have no backward binary or TASTy compatibility consequences.
+The semantics of the proposed new construct is fully expressible in terms of desugaring into current syntax, interpreteted with current semantics.
+
+The proposed syntax is not currently legal Scala.
+Therefore no currently existing program could be interpreted with different semantics using a newer compiler version supporting multiple assignments.
+
+### Other concerns
+
+One understandable concern of the proposed syntax is that the semantics of multiple assignments resembles that of pattern matching, yet it has different semantics.
+For example:
+
+```scala
+val (a(x), b) = (true, "!") // 1
+
+(a(x), b) = (true, "!")     // 2
+```
+
+If `a` is instance of a type with a companion extractor object, the two lines above have completely different semantics.
+The first declares two local bindings `x` and `b`, applying pattern matching to determine their value from the tuple `(true, "!")`.
+The second is assigning `a(x)` and `b` to the values `true` and `"!"`, respectively.
+
+Though possibly surprising, the difference in behavior is easy to explain.
+The first line applies pattern matching because it starts with `val`.
+The second doesn't because it involves no pattern matching introducer.
+Further, note that a similar situation can already be reproduced in current Scala:
+
+```scala
+val a(x) = true // 1
+
+a(x) = true     // 2
+```
+
+## Alternatives
+
+The current proposal supports arbitrary tree structures on the LHS of the assignment.
+A simpler alternative would be to only support flat sequences, allowing the syntax to dispense with parentheses.
+
+```scala
+a, b = b, a
+```
+
+While this approach is more lightweight, the reduced expressiveness inhibits potentially interesting use cases.
+Further, consistently using tuple syntax on both sides of the equality operator clearly distinguishes regular and multiple assignments.
+
+## Related work
+
+A Pre-SIP discussion took place prior to this proposal (see [here](https://contributors.scala-lang.org/t/pre-sip-multiple-assignments/6425/1)).
+
+Multiple assignments are present in many contemporary languages.
+This proposal already illustrated them in Swift, but they are also commonly used in Python.
+Multiple assigments have also been studied extensively in scienific literature (e.g., [1, 2]).
+
+## FAQ
+
+## References
+
+1. Edsger W. Dijkstra: A Discipline of Programming. Prentice-Hall 1976, ISBN 013215871X
+2. Ralph-Johan Back, Joakim von Wright: Refinement Calculus - A Systematic Introduction. Graduate Texts in Computer Science, Springer 1998, ISBN 978-0-387-98417-9
