11

以下程序的内存分析表明,noleak 函数在常量内存中运行,而泄漏函数以线性方式泄漏内存。dflemstr 指出这可能是由于 RWST 导致了无限的分配链。是这种情况吗?还有其他解决方案吗?我实际上不需要 Writer monad。

环境:

ARCH 64 位上的 GHC 7.8.3

ghc Pipe.hs -o 管道 -prof

import Control.Concurrent (threadDelay)
import Control.Monad (forever)

import Pipes
import Control.Monad.Trans.RWS.Strict

main = leak

effectLeak :: Effect (RWST () () () IO) ()
effectLeak =
  (forever $ do
      liftIO . threadDelay $ 10000 * 1
      yield "Space") >->
  (forever $ do
      text <- await
      yield $ text ++ (" leak" :: String)) >->
  (forever $ do
      text <- await
      liftIO . print $ text
  )

effectNoleak :: Effect IO ()
effectNoleak =
  (forever $ do
      lift . threadDelay $ 10000 * 1
      yield "Space") >->
  (forever $ do
      text <- await
      yield $ text ++ (" leak" :: String)) >->
  (forever $ do
      text <- await
      lift . print $ text
  )

leak = (\e -> runRWST e () ()) . runEffect $ effectLeak

noleak = runEffect $ effectNoleak
4

2 回答 2

14

Zeta 是对的,空间泄漏是因为WriterT. WriterT并且RWST(“严格”和惰性版本)无论您使用什么幺半群,总是会泄漏空间。

我在这里写了一个更长的解释,但这里是摘要:不泄漏空间的唯一方法是WriterT使用StateTmonad 进行tell模拟,其中使用 strict 进行模拟put,如下所示:

newtype WriterT w m a = WriterT { unWriterT :: w -> m (a, w) }

instance (Monad m, Monoid w) => Monad (WriterT w m) where
    return a = WriterT $ \w -> return (a, w)
    m >>= f  = WriterT $ \w -> do
        (a, w') <- unWriterT m w
        unWriterT (f a) w'

runWriterT :: (Monoid w) => WriterT w m a -> m (a, w)
runWriterT m = unWriterT m mempty

tell :: (Monad m, Monoid w) => w -> WriterT w m ()
tell w = WriterT $ \w' ->
    let wt = w `mappend` w'
     in wt `seq` return ((), wt)

这基本上相当于:

type WriterT = StateT

runWriterT m = runStateT m mempty

tell w = do
    w' <- get
    put $! mappend w w'
于 2014-08-13T13:35:41.810 回答
12

看起来这Writer部分RWST实际上是罪魁祸首:

instance (Monoid w, Monad m) => Monad (RWST r w s m) where
    return a = RWST $ \ _ s -> return (a, s, mempty)
    m >>= k  = RWST $ \ r s -> do
        (a, s', w)  <- runRWST m r s
        (b, s'',w') <- runRWST (k a) r s'
        return (b, s'', w `mappend` w') -- mappend
    fail msg = RWST $ \ _ _ -> fail msg

如您所见,作者使用普通的mappend. 由于(,,)它的论点并不严格,因此w `mappend` w'构建了一系列 thunk,即使是艰难的Monoid实例() 也是相当微不足道的:

instance Monoid () where
        -- Should it be strict?
        mempty        = ()
        _ `mappend` _ = ()
        mconcat _     = ()

为了解决这个问题,您需要w `mappend` w'在元组中添加严格性:

        let wt = w `mappend` w'
        wt `seq` return (b, s'', wt) 

但是,如果您仍然不需要Writer,您可以简单地使用ReaderT r (StateT st m)

import Control.Monad.Trans.Reader
import Control.Monad.Trans.State.Strict

type RST r st m = ReaderT r (StateT st m)

runRST :: Monad m => RST r st m a -> r -> st -> m (a,st)
runRST rst r st = flip runStateT st . flip runReaderT r $ rst

但是,鉴于这将迫使您对lift正确的 monad 进行计算,您可能希望改用该mtl。代码将保持不变,但在这种情况下导入将如下

import Control.Monad.Reader
import Control.Monad.State.Strict
于 2014-08-13T11:41:12.220 回答