Page:AITR-474.djvu/21

(3) (4) 5 6 11 A macro facility (the ability to specify syntactic transformations) makes it practical to use these as the only definitions of imperative constructs in a programming system. Such a facility makes it extremely easy to define new constructs. A few well-chosen optimization strategies enable the compilation of these applicative definitions into the imperative low-level code which one would expect from a traditional compiler. The macro facility and the optimization techniques used by the compiler can be conceptually unified. The same properties which make it easy to write the macros make it easy to define optimizations correctly. In the same way that many programming constructs are defined in terms of a small, well- chosen basis set, so a large number of traditional optimization techniques fall out as special cases of the few used in RABBIT. This is no accident. The separate treatment of a large and diverse set of constructs necessitates separate optimization techniques for each. As the basis set of constructs is reduced, so is the set of interesting transformations. If the basis set is properly chosen, their combined effect is "multiplicative" rather than "additive". The technique of compiling by converting to continuation-passing style elucidates some important compilation issues in a natural way. Intermediate quantities are made manifest; so is the precise order of evaluation. Moreover, this is all expressed in a language isomorphic to a subset of the source language SCHEME; as a result the continuation-passing style version of a p-rogram inherits many of the philosophical and practical advantages. For example, the same optimization techniques can be applied at this level as at the original source level. While the use of continuation-passing style may not make the decisions any easier, it provides an effective and