{"title":"一台非常有表现力的打印机","authors":"Sorawee Porncharoenwase, Justin Pombrio, Emina Torlak","doi":"10.1145/3622837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pretty printers make trade-offs between the expressiveness of their pretty printing language, the optimality objective that they minimize when choosing between different ways to lay out a document, and the performance of their algorithm. This paper presents a new pretty printer, Π e , that is strictly more expressive than all pretty printers in the literature and provably minimizes an optimality objective. Furthermore, the time complexity of Π e is better than many existing pretty printers. When choosing among different ways to lay out a document, Π e consults a user-supplied cost factory , which determines the optimality objective, giving Π e a unique degree of flexibility. We use the Lean theorem prover to verify the correctness (validity and optimality) of Π e , and implement Π e concretely as a pretty printer that we call PrettyExpressive. To evaluate our pretty printer against others, we develop a formal framework for reasoning about the expressiveness of pretty printing languages, and survey pretty printers in the literature, comparing their expressiveness, optimality, worst-case time complexity, and practical running time. Our evaluation shows that PrettyExpressive is efficient and effective at producing optimal layouts. PrettyExpressive has also seen real-world adoption: it serves as a foundation of a code formatter for Racket.","PeriodicalId":20697,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages","volume":"227 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Pretty Expressive Printer\",\"authors\":\"Sorawee Porncharoenwase, Justin Pombrio, Emina Torlak\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3622837\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Pretty printers make trade-offs between the expressiveness of their pretty printing language, the optimality objective that they minimize when choosing between different ways to lay out a document, and the performance of their algorithm. This paper presents a new pretty printer, Π e , that is strictly more expressive than all pretty printers in the literature and provably minimizes an optimality objective. Furthermore, the time complexity of Π e is better than many existing pretty printers. When choosing among different ways to lay out a document, Π e consults a user-supplied cost factory , which determines the optimality objective, giving Π e a unique degree of flexibility. We use the Lean theorem prover to verify the correctness (validity and optimality) of Π e , and implement Π e concretely as a pretty printer that we call PrettyExpressive. To evaluate our pretty printer against others, we develop a formal framework for reasoning about the expressiveness of pretty printing languages, and survey pretty printers in the literature, comparing their expressiveness, optimality, worst-case time complexity, and practical running time. Our evaluation shows that PrettyExpressive is efficient and effective at producing optimal layouts. PrettyExpressive has also seen real-world adoption: it serves as a foundation of a code formatter for Racket.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages\",\"volume\":\"227 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3622837\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3622837","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pretty printers make trade-offs between the expressiveness of their pretty printing language, the optimality objective that they minimize when choosing between different ways to lay out a document, and the performance of their algorithm. This paper presents a new pretty printer, Π e , that is strictly more expressive than all pretty printers in the literature and provably minimizes an optimality objective. Furthermore, the time complexity of Π e is better than many existing pretty printers. When choosing among different ways to lay out a document, Π e consults a user-supplied cost factory , which determines the optimality objective, giving Π e a unique degree of flexibility. We use the Lean theorem prover to verify the correctness (validity and optimality) of Π e , and implement Π e concretely as a pretty printer that we call PrettyExpressive. To evaluate our pretty printer against others, we develop a formal framework for reasoning about the expressiveness of pretty printing languages, and survey pretty printers in the literature, comparing their expressiveness, optimality, worst-case time complexity, and practical running time. Our evaluation shows that PrettyExpressive is efficient and effective at producing optimal layouts. PrettyExpressive has also seen real-world adoption: it serves as a foundation of a code formatter for Racket.