Difference between revision 4 and current revision
Summary: Rollback to 2008-09-05 00:16 UTCNo diff available.
Edited by AlexSchroeder, who thinks the code looks impressive, eventhough I doesn’t understand it. I’m keeping it here for myself to read when I have some more time.
From: ThomasBurdick Subject: Re: producing nice code (was Re: (very longish!) Re: how to read input from a file) Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Date: 01 Oct 2001 01:40:00 -0700
Below is a revised implementation that keeps states in their own (dynamically-scoped) namespace, so you can use the same name for a variable and a state, which is how it should be. I think it’s kind of a nice example of how much you can accomplish in a screen-full of lisp.
(require 'cl) (defvar state-hash (make-hash-table))
(defmacro define-state (name &rest body) (let ((thunk `(lambda () ,@body))) `(setf (gethash ',name state-hash) ',thunk)))
(defmacro define-state-machine (name &rest states) (let ((-starting-state (gensym "starting-state--")) (-state (gensym "state--")) (-state-machine (gensym "state-machine--")) (state-alist (loop for state in (cons 'halt states) collect (cons state (gensym (symbol-name state))))) (-state-alist (gensym "state-alist--"))) `(defun ,name (,-starting-state) (block ,name (let ((,-state-alist ',state-alist)) (macrolet ((state (name) (let ((sym (cdr (assoc name ,-state-alist)))) (list 'throw '(quote ,-state-machine) sym)))) (let ((,(cdr (assoc 'halt state-alist)) (lambda () (return-from ,name))) ,@(loop for state-name in states collect `(,(cdr (assoc state-name state-alist)) ',(gethash state-name state-hash)))) (let ((,-state (symbol-value (cdr (assoc ,-starting-state ,-state-alist))))) (while t (setf ,-state (catch ',-state-machine (funcall ,-state))))))))))))
The above code goes together with this older message by Thomas.
From: ThomasBurdick Date: 30 Sep 2001 17:36:08 -0700
It’s kind of hairy, because it’s doing two low-level things: building a state machine, and emulating a tagbody. Just so you know, in Common Lisp, TAGBODY and GO allow you to do go-to statements:
(let ((a)) (tagbody START (setf a 0) PART-1 (incf a) (princ a) (terpri) (cond ((>= a 10) (go end)) ((oddp a) (go part-1)) (t (go part-2))) PART-2 (incf a) (go part-1) END (princ "We're done printing the odd numbers between 0 and 10")))
1 3 5 7 9 We're done printing the odd numbers between 0 and 10
(Again, this only works in Common Lisp; Elisp doesn’t have tagbody or go)
Generally go-to statements are the wrong thing to do. However, they are quite useful for implementing more abstract control structures (such as state machines, to pick a random example , which are generally the right thing to use.
Now, let’s start defining a state machine to count to 10, and look at the expansion of the macros as we go:
(define-state start (princ "I am starting...") (terpri) (setf number 1) (state count))
This expands to:
(setf (gethash 'start state-hash) '(lambda () (princ "I am starting...") (terpri) (setf number 1) (state count)))
Now let’s define the rest of our states:
(define-state count (cond ((<= number 10) (princ number) (incf number) (state count)) (t (state end))))
(define-state end (terpri) (princ "I am ending...") (terpri) (terpri) (state halt))
These act similarly to functions, but they run in the context of a machine that switches between various states. When the machine is in the state
‘count’, for example it executes the body we defined above. A state should end by sitching to another state, via a call to the function
‘state’ (which we saw above).
‘halt’ is a special state that will always be defined, and will halt the state machine and cause it to return
‘nil’ (even though I forgot to include this in the first version, whoops).
Now let’s define and use our state machine:
(define-state-machine counter start end count) (counter 'start) I am starting... 12345678910 I am ending...
What did the (define-state-machine counter …) form do? Let’s look at what it expands into:
ELISP> (macroexpand '(define-state-machine counter start end count)) (defun counter (starting-state--30201) (block counter (flet ((state (name) (throw 'state-machine--30203 name))) (let ((halt (lambda () (return-from counter))) (start '(lambda () (princ "I am starting...") (terpri) (setf number 1) (state count))) (end '(lambda () (terpri) (princ "I am ending...") (terpri) (terpri) (state halt))) (count '(lambda () (cond ((<= number 10) (princ number) (incf number) (state count)) (t (state end)))))) (let ((state--30202 (symbol-value starting-state--30201))) (while t (setf state--30202 (catch 'state-machine--30203 (funcall state--30202)))))))))
So, first look at the
‘while’ loop: we funcall the value of state* (these are uninterned symbols, which means they won’t conflict with any symbols you might use). This should be a function that does something then calls
‘state’, which should
‘throw’ to our (catch ‘state-machine* …) form. The value this catches is assigned to state*, and we repeat. So the form (state end) in the count state calls the
‘state’ function, passing it the value of
‘end’, which we can see in the
So, the whole point of the define-state and define-state-machine macros are so that you don’t need to worry about the nastiness in the expansion; instead you can just write up the behavior of your states in nice little modules, and leave it to the macros to put them together.