X-Git-Url: https://git.ralfj.de/web.git/blobdiff_plain/338c1acdf25f60a2336d1d41bb747948390d165e..79c9a789a9d04a724d315b4365d89ebdb9143b38:/ralf/_posts/2019-07-14-uninit.md?ds=inline

diff --git a/ralf/_posts/2019-07-14-uninit.md b/ralf/_posts/2019-07-14-uninit.md
index f454bfd..a5656b4 100644
--- a/ralf/_posts/2019-07-14-uninit.md
+++ b/ralf/_posts/2019-07-14-uninit.md
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 ---
 title: '"What The Hardware Does" is not What Your Program Does: Uninitialized Memory'
 categories: rust
+forum: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/what-the-hardware-does-is-not-what-your-program-does-uninitialized-memory/10561
 ---
 
 This post is about uninitialized memory, but also about the semantics of highly optimized "low-level" languages in general.
@@ -53,7 +54,7 @@ However, if you [run the example](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mod
 ## What *is* uninitialized memory?
 
 How is this possible?
-The answer is that every byte in memory cannot just have a value in `0..256`, it can also be "uninitialized".
+The answer is that every byte in memory cannot just have a value in `0..256` (this is Rust/Ruby syntax for a left-inclusive right-exclusive range), it can also be "uninitialized".
 Memory *remembers* if you initialized it.
 The `x` that is passed to `always_return_true` is *not* the 8-bit representation of some number, it is an uninitialized byte.
 Performing operations such as comparison on uninitialized bytes is undefined behavior.
@@ -90,6 +91,14 @@ Over time, we will come to some kind of compromise here.
 The important part (for both Rust and C/C++) however is that we have this discussion with a clear mental model in our minds for *what uninitialized memory is*.
 I see Rust on a good path here; I hope the C/C++ committees will eventually follow suit.
 
+Ruling out any operation on uninitialized values also makes it impossible to implement [this cute data structure](https://research.swtch.com/sparse).
+The `is-member` function there relies on the assumption that "observing" an uninitialized value (`sparse[i]`) twice gives the same result, which as we have seen above is not the case.
+This could be fixed by providing a "freeze" operation that, given any data, replaces the uninitialized bytes by *some* non-deterministically chosen *initialized* bytes.
+It is called "freeze" because its effect is that the value "stops changing each time you observe it".
+`is-member` would freeze `sparse[i]` once and then know for sure that "looking at it" twice will give consistent results.
+Unfortunately, since C/C++ do not acknowledge that their memory model is what it is, we do not have crucial operations such as "freeze" officially supported in compilers.
+At least for LLVM, that [might change though](http://www.cs.utah.edu/~regehr/papers/undef-pldi17.pdf).
+
 ## "What the hardware does" considered harmful
 
 Maybe the most important lesson to take away from this post is that "what the hardware does" is most of the time *irrelevant* when discussing what a Rust/C/C++ program does.
@@ -113,4 +122,6 @@ I hope C/C++ will come around to do the same, and there is some [great work in t
 If you want to do me a favor, please spread the word!
 I am trying hard to combat the myth of "what the hardware does" in Rust discussions whenever I see it, but I obviously don't see all the discussions---so the next time you see such an argument, no matter whether it is about uninitialized memory or [concurrency](http://hboehm.info/boehm-hotpar11.pdf) or [out-of-bounds memory accesses](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32976#issuecomment-446775360) or anything else, please help by steering the discussion towards "what the Rust abstract machine does", and how we can design and adjust the Rust abstract machine in a way that it is most useful for programmers and optimizing compilers alike.
 
+As usual, if you have any comments, suggestions or questions, [let me know in the forums](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/what-the-hardware-does-is-not-what-your-program-does-uninitialized-memory/10561).
+
 #### Footnotes