mirror of
https://github.com/AleoHQ/leo.git
synced 2024-11-13 08:47:17 +03:00
Merge pull request #1187 from AleoHQ/rfc-type-aliases
[RFC] Initial RFC for type aliases.
This commit is contained in:
commit
c655b636d3
162
docs/rfc/007-type-aliases.md
Normal file
162
docs/rfc/007-type-aliases.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
|
||||
# Leo RFC 007: Type Aliases
|
||||
|
||||
## Authors
|
||||
|
||||
- Max Bruce
|
||||
- Collin Chin
|
||||
- Alessandro Coglio
|
||||
- Eric McCarthy
|
||||
- Jon Pavlik
|
||||
- Damir Shamanaev
|
||||
- Damon Sicore
|
||||
- Howard Wu
|
||||
|
||||
## Status
|
||||
|
||||
DRAFT
|
||||
|
||||
# Summary
|
||||
|
||||
This RFC proposes the addition of type aliases to Leo,
|
||||
i.e. identifiers that abbreviate types and can be used wherever the latter can be used.
|
||||
A new top-level construct is proposed to define type aliases; no circularities are allowed.
|
||||
Type aliases are expanded away during compilation.
|
||||
|
||||
# Motivation
|
||||
|
||||
Many programming languages provide the ability to create aliases (i.e. synonyms) of types, such as C's `typedef`.
|
||||
The purpose may be to abbreviate a longer type,
|
||||
such as an alias `matrix` for `[i32; (3, 3)]` in an application in which 3x3 matrices of 32-bit integers are relevant
|
||||
(e.g. for 3-D rotations, even though fractional numbers may be more realistic).
|
||||
The purpose may also be to clarify the purpose and use of an existing type,
|
||||
such as an alias `balance` for `u64` in an application that keeps track of balances.
|
||||
|
||||
The initial motivation that inspired this RFC (along with other RFCs)
|
||||
was the ability to have a type `string` for strings.
|
||||
Strings are arrays of characters according to RFC 001.
|
||||
With the array types of unspecified size proposed in RFC 006,
|
||||
`[char; _]` becomes a generic type for strings, which is desirable to alias with `string`.
|
||||
|
||||
# Design
|
||||
|
||||
## Syntax
|
||||
|
||||
The ABNF grammar changes as follows:
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
; modified rule:
|
||||
keyword = ...
|
||||
/ %s"true"
|
||||
/ %s"type" ; new
|
||||
/ %s"u8"
|
||||
/ ...
|
||||
|
||||
; new rule:
|
||||
type-alias-declaration = %s"type" identifier "=" type ";"
|
||||
|
||||
; modified rule:
|
||||
declaration = import-declaration
|
||||
/ function-declaration
|
||||
/ circuit-declaration
|
||||
/ constant-declaration
|
||||
/ type-alias-declaration ; new
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A type alias declaration introduces the identifier to stand for the type.
|
||||
Only top-level type alias declarations are supported;
|
||||
they are not supported inside functions or circuit types.
|
||||
|
||||
## Semantics
|
||||
|
||||
There must be no direct or indirect circularity in the type aliases.
|
||||
That is, it must be possible to expand all the type aliases away,
|
||||
obtaining an equivalent program without any type aliases.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that the built-in `Self` is a bit like a type alias, standing for the enclosing circuit type;
|
||||
and `Self` is replaced with the enclosing circuit type during canonicalization.
|
||||
Thus, canonicalization could be a natural place to expand user-defined type aliases;
|
||||
after all, type aliases introduce multiple ways to denote the same types
|
||||
(and not just via direct aliasing, but also via indirect aliasing, or via aliasing of components),
|
||||
and canonicalization serves exactly to reduce multiple ways to say the same thing to one canonical way.
|
||||
|
||||
On the other hand, expanding type aliases is more complicated than the current canonicalization transformations,
|
||||
which are all local and relatively simple.
|
||||
Expanding type aliases requires not only checking for circularities,
|
||||
but also to take into account references to type aliases from import declarations.
|
||||
For this reason, we may perform type alias expansion after canonicalization,
|
||||
such as just before type checking and inference.
|
||||
We could also make the expansion a part of the type checking and inference process,
|
||||
which already transforms the program by inferring missing types,
|
||||
so it could also expand type aliases away.
|
||||
|
||||
In any case, it seems beneficial to expand type aliases away
|
||||
(whether during canonicalization or as part or preamble to type checking and inference)
|
||||
prior to performing more processing of the program for eventual compilation to R1CS.
|
||||
|
||||
## Examples
|
||||
|
||||
The aforementioned 3x3 matrix example could be written as follows:
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
type matrix = [u32; (3, 3)];
|
||||
|
||||
function matrix_multiply(x: matrix, y: matrix) -> matrix {
|
||||
...
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The aforementioned balance example could be written as follows:
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
type balance = u64;
|
||||
|
||||
function f(...) -> (..., balance, ...) {
|
||||
...
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The aforementioned string example could be written as follows:
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
type string = [char; _];
|
||||
|
||||
function f(str: string) -> ... {
|
||||
...
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
# Drawbacks
|
||||
|
||||
As other extensions of the language, this makes things inherently a bit more complicated.
|
||||
|
||||
# Effect on Ecosystem
|
||||
|
||||
None; this is just a convenience for the Leo developer.
|
||||
|
||||
# Alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
An alternative to creating a type alias
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
type T = U;
|
||||
```
|
||||
is to create a circuit type
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
circuit T { get: U }
|
||||
```
|
||||
that contains a single member variable.
|
||||
|
||||
This is clearly not equivalent to a type alias, because it involves conversions between `T` and `U`
|
||||
```ts
|
||||
T { get: u } // convert u:U to T
|
||||
t.get // convert t:T to U
|
||||
```
|
||||
whereas a type alias involves no conversions:
|
||||
if `T` is an alias of `U`, then `T` and `U` are the same type,
|
||||
more precisely two syntactically different ways to designate the same semantic type.
|
||||
|
||||
While the conversions generally cause overhead in traditional programming languages,
|
||||
this may not be the case for Leo's compilation to R1CS,
|
||||
in which everything is flattened, including member variables of circuit types.
|
||||
Thus, it may be the case that the circuit `T` above reduces to just its member `U` in R1CS.
|
||||
|
||||
It might also be argued that wrapping a type into a one-member-variable circuit type
|
||||
could be a better practice than aliasing the type, to enforce better type separation and safety.
|
||||
|
||||
We need to consider the pros and cons of the two approaches,
|
||||
particularly in light of Leo's non-traditional compilation target.
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user