# Whetstone DSL: Project Requirements Overview ## Vision Statement **Source code should be a structured database of logic, not a text file of syntax.** Whetstone is a Universal Logic Database that stores code as a semantic graph (AST), with traditional programming languages serving as **projections** of that canonical representation. This enables lossless transpilation, massively parallel development (human and AI agents), and complete separation of intent from implementation. --- ## Core Philosophy ### The Problem: Text Blindness Current software engineering couples **Intent** (what we want to happen) with **Implementation** (how the machine does it) through language-specific syntax. This creates: - Lock-in to specific languages and ecosystems - Loss of semantic information during translation - Inability to express cross-cutting concerns (ownership, risk, optimization hints) - Barriers to parallel development by multiple agents ### The Solution: Projectional Editing Move the "Source of Truth" from text files to a **Logical Graph Database**: | Text-Based | Graph-Based (Whetstone) | |------------|-------------------------| | Linear | Structural | | Ambiguous | Explicit | | Syntax-heavy | Meaning-heavy | | Language-specific | Universal | --- ## Architecture: The Three Layers ### Layer 1: The Logic Database (Definition) A schema of pure logical concepts stored in a graph/tree database (JetBrains MPS). **Core Principle:** This layer must be a **superset** of all target languages. It must express concepts like memory ownership (Rust-style) even when targeting languages that don't require them (Python). **Contents:** - AST node concepts (expressions, statements, functions, types) - Semantic annotations (SemAnno schema) - Hypergraph relationships (nodes participate in multiple relationships) ### Layer 2: Semantic Generators (Bridge) Generators that translate the Logic Database into idiomatic text for specific runtimes. **Example - SharedMemoryBlock concept:** ``` Generator A (Python): x = [1, 2, 3] # Note: Shared usage implied Generator B (Rust): let x = Arc::new(Mutex::new(vec![1, 2, 3])); Generator C (Verilog): reg [31:0] memory [0:2]; ``` ### Layer 3: Runtime (Metal) Standard toolchains (GCC, LLVM, Python interpreter) compile/execute the generated code. Whetstone does not replace compilers; it feeds them optimized, correct input. --- ## SemAnno: Universal Semantic Annotation Schema Six annotation systems provide metadata for agents (human and AI): ### 1. Complexity & Intelligence ("Rank" System) Defines who/what is qualified to modify a node. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@complexity-score` | int | Derived from cyclomatic complexity, nesting, mutation | | `@intelligence-requirement` | junior/mid/senior | Agent tier required for modification | | `@review-lock` | bool | Requires second agent verification | ### 2. Dependency & Impact ("Radius" System) Calculates the "blast radius" of changes. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@dependency-count` | int | Incoming references to this node | | `@dependency-level` | 0-100 | Normalized importance score | | `@downstream-impact` | list | Affected domains [Network, Security, Billing] | | `@fragility` | low/high | Load-bearing legacy code flag | ### 3. Performance & Resource ("Machinist" System) Low-level optimization metadata. See `annotations/6 optimization and intent.md` for full details. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@Hot` / `@Cold` | hint | Profile-guided branch prediction → C++ `[[likely]]`/`[[unlikely]]` | | `@Inline(Always\|Never\|Hint)` | mode | Function inlining control | | `@Pure` | flag | No side effects (referential transparency) | | `@Loop(Unroll,N)` / `@Loop(Vectorize)` / `@Loop(Fuse)` | transform | Loop transformation hints | | `@Data(Prefetch)` / `@Data(Restrict)` | hint | Memory locality / alias analysis | | `@Align(N)` / `@Pack` / `@ConstExpr` | layout | Hardware alignment, packing, compile-time evaluation | | `@Policy(Perf: Critical)` | guardrail | Prioritizes zero-cost abstractions over safety wrappers | ### 4. Architectural Intent ("Paradigm" System) Defines behavioral contracts. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@intent` | Pure/Stateful/Parallel/Legacy | Primary behavioral contract | | `@preferred-view` | language | Optimal projection for readability | | `@lifecycle` | owner/borrower/transient | Ownership model hints | ### 5. Security & Risk ("Sentinel" System) Granular risk tracking. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@risk-type` | identifier | BufferOverflow, RaceCondition, SideChannel | | `@trust-boundary` | marker | Secure environment transition point | | `@provenance` | hash | Chain of agent modifications | ### 6. Projective Metadata ("Lens" System) Controls rendering in projectional environments. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@view-mask` | category | Toggle annotation visibility by type | | `@cognitive-level` | 0-100 | Detail density filter | | `@projection-alias` | string | Localized renaming without AST change | | `@hidden-detail` | bool | Collapse boilerplate for reviews | ### 7. Language-Specific Idioms ("Polyglot" System) Preserves language-specific features that don't map directly to other languages. | Annotation | Type | Purpose | |------------|------|---------| | `@lang_specific` | structured | Captures idiom with language, type, raw syntax, and semantic hint | **Architecture:** ``` @lang_specific(python, "decorator", "@lru_cache(maxsize=128)", hint="memoization") @lang_specific(cpp, "template", "template", hint="generic") ``` **Projection Behavior:** - In native language: renders as original syntax - In foreign language: renders as comment with semantic hint **Long-term Vision:** These annotations enable future semantic equivalence detection. When the system understands that `@lru_cache` and a C++ `std::map`-based cache serve the same purpose ("memoization"), it can generate idiomatic implementations in either direction rather than just commenting. --- ## Memory Management Annotations Memory management is decoupled from logic as a first-class AST field. The canonical annotation system (defined in `annotations/Memory strategy.md`) uses distinct annotation families, each targeting a specific memory paradigm: | Annotation | Paradigm | Description | Key Languages | |---|---|---|---| | `@Deallocate(Explicit)` | Manual (MM) | Explicit allocation/deallocation, direct `free()`/`delete` | C, C++ (manual mode), Zig | | `@Lifetime(RAII)` | RAII | Destructor-based cleanup at scope end | C++ | | `@Reclaim(Tracing)` | GC | Automatic runtime reclamation via tracing/mark-sweep | Python, Java, JS, Go, C#, Ruby | | `@Reclaim(Cycle)` | GC | Cycle-detection garbage collection | PHP | | `@Reclaim(Escape)` | GC | Escape-analysis-based heap vs stack decision | Go | | `@Owner(Single)` | Ownership | Compile-time single-owner lifetime tracking (Rust-like) | Rust | | `@Owner(Shared_ARC)` | ARC | Deterministic reference counting | Swift, Objective-C | | `@Allocate(Static)` | Static | Fixed memory buffers, no dynamic allocation | Fortran | | `@Allocate(Register)` | Register | Direct register mapping or stack spill | Assembly | | `@Allocate(Allocator)` | Allocator | Explicit allocator parameter threading | Zig | ### The "Unfilled Node Constraint" In `@Deallocate(Explicit)` mode, the AST requires an explicit **Deallocation Time Field**. If empty, the editor flags it as a "Missing Intent" error. This makes it impossible to forget a deallocation point. ### Lossless Projection Logic When the transpiler encounters a memory annotation that the target language cannot express natively (see `annotations/Memory strategy.md` Section 3): - **High-Level → Low-Level** (e.g., Python → C): `@Reclaim(Tracing)` → inject `INC_REF`/`DEC_REF` shim with `free()` on zero - **Low-Level → High-Level** (e.g., C → Java): `@Deallocate(Explicit)` → wrap in `try-with-resources` or `Cleaner` API - **Strict → Permissive** (e.g., Rust → Python): `@Owner(Single)` → preserve in AST metadata, no enforcement in generated code --- ## Strategy Toggles Declarative optimization patterns applicable without manual implementation: | Toggle | Effect | |--------|--------| | `@strategy(TCO)` | Convert recursive logic to iterative machine code | | `@strategy(Memoize)` | Inject thread-safe cache for function results | | `@strategy(Unroll)` | Duplicate loop bodies per target-hardware heuristic | | `@strategy(SSO)` | Enable Small String/Buffer Optimization | --- ## Transpilation Modes ### Direct Transpilation ("Wrapper") Maps nodes 1-to-1. High compatibility, poor performance. - Python dynamic list → `std::vector` with runtime type-checking ### Idiomatic Transpilation ("Intent") Analyzes usage patterns. High performance, hardware sympathy. - Python list (append-only, sequential read) → `std::vector` or Memory Arena --- ## The Resolution Slider Four levels from intent to execution: | Level | Description | Example | |-------|-------------|---------| | 1 | Pseudocode/Intent | "Find a user in a list" | | 2 | High-Level (JS/Python) | `Array.find()` | | 3 | Intermediate (Rust/Java) | Type safety + ownership scopes | | 4 | Execution Substrate (C++/C) | B-Trees, SIMD, Branch Hints | --- ## Multi-Agent Collaboration ### The Round-Trip Problem When a systems engineer optimizes code that a high-level developer later modifies. ### Solution: Persistent Metadata Separation - **Logic Field:** Algorithmic intent (editable by junior) - **Optimization Field:** Systems-level instructions (requires senior) ### Conflict Management When high-level changes break low-level optimizations: 1. **Shadowed Metadata:** Old optimizations hidden but not deleted 2. **Alerting:** "Performance Guardrail" warning shown 3. **Diff Lens:** Visualizes where intent changes invalidated hardware instructions --- ## Hypergraph Requirement Standard ASTs are strictly hierarchical (Parent → Child). Real-world logic is a **Hypergraph**: - A Variable is **owned by** Function A - But **used by** Function B - And **monitored by** Agent C **Implementation:** Smart References (Hyperedges) allow a single logical node to participate in multiple relationships simultaneously. --- ## Agent-Native Development ### Task Decomposition Model 1. **High-context coordinator agent** builds semantic graph and queues tasks 2. **Small Language Models (8B)** handle tightly scoped tasks 3. **Human developers** work from the same task queue ### Projection Optimization Tasks can be projected in: - **Human-optimized view:** Natural language descriptions, readable code - **AI-optimized view:** Structured data, explicit constraints, minimal ambiguity ### Agent Tiers | Tier | Capabilities | |------|--------------| | Junior | Basic logic, no memory management, no high-risk annotations | | Mid | Standard logic, `@Lifetime(RAII)`, `@Reclaim(Tracing)`, `@Owner(Shared_ARC)` | | Senior | `@Deallocate(Explicit)`, `@Owner(Single)`, hardware optimization, high-risk refactoring | --- ## Target Applications ### Legacy Modernization Parse old Fortran/COBOL → Logic Database → Generate modern C++/Rust/Julia ### Cross-Platform Logic Write business logic once → Generate Kotlin (Android), Swift (iOS), Rust (backend) ### Agentic Coding Agents manipulate Graph Nodes directly (no syntax errors from text generation) ### Parallel Development Multiple developers/agents work on same codebase with explicit conflict boundaries --- ## Technical Principles ### Behavior Over Implementation A node's primary definition is its **Behavioral Contract** (e.g., "Sort this collection") rather than implementation (e.g., "Quicksort with pointer increments"). ### Substrate-Agnostic Core Nodes Core AST nodes must not assume specific memory models or hardware constraints. - **Bad:** LoopNode requires a "Pointer" field - **Good:** LoopNode requires an "IteratorIntent" - realization is metadata ### The Semantic Boundary Strict boundary between **What** (Logic) and **How** (Execution Strategy). Future capabilities are implemented by adding Strategy Engines to existing nodes, not re-architecting nodes. ### Strictest Common Denominator The Logic Database enforces strict rules by default (explicit ownership), while Generators can "relax" rules for permissive languages or "poly-fill" rules for strict languages. --- ## The C Primitives Substrate (Long-term Vision) All high-level language features ultimately resolve to C-level primitives: | High-Level Feature | C Primitive Resolution | |-------------------|------------------------| | Python `@lru_cache` | Hash table + function pointer + malloc/free | | C++ `template` | N compiled copies with concrete types | | Python decorator | Function pointer manipulation | | C++ RAII | Constructor/destructor at scope boundaries | | Rust ownership | Compile-time tracking → equivalent to manual C | | Garbage collection | Reference counting or mark-sweep algorithms | **Architectural Implication:** ``` Level 4: Language Idioms @py_decl, @cpp_tmpl, @rust_lifetime │ ▼ Level 3: Universal AST Function, Loop, Variable, Expression │ ▼ Level 2: Semantic Intent "memoize", "parameterize by type", "scope-bound cleanup" │ ▼ Level 1: C Primitives pointers, structs, malloc/free, function calls ``` **End State:** Languages become pure *syntactic projections* over C primitives + semantic annotations. This enables true lossless transpilation because the canonical form captures both the intent (semantic annotations) and the implementation (C primitives). --- ## Implementation Platform **JetBrains MPS (Meta Programming System)** - Projectional editor (edit AST directly, not text) - Language workbench for defining DSLs - Built-in support for generators - Extensible type system and constraints --- ## Success Criteria 1. **Lossless Round-Trip:** Python → AST → C++ → AST → Python produces semantically equivalent code 2. **Parallel Safety:** Junior developer cannot accidentally break senior's optimizations 3. **Agent Compatibility:** Tasks can be completed by SLMs with sufficient annotation context 4. **Performance Parity:** Generated C++ matches hand-written C++ for common patterns 5. **Adoption Path:** Existing codebases can be incrementally imported via tree-sitter parsing