O. Danvy and K. Malmkjaer. Intensions and extensions in a re ective tower. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, pages 327{ 341, 1988. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
M-LISP: Its Natural Semantics and Equational Logic (Extended.. - Muller (1991) (Correct)
....rst. It is worth noting that the counter example is a program. 4 Related Work While there are a large number of studies of LISP with which we share either our general methodology (e.g. Gor75, Car76, Mas86, MT89, FFKD86, Fel88] or our general subject matter (e.g. Pit80, MP80, Smi82] or [Smi84, dRS84, FW84, FW86, DM88, Baw88]) we are unfamiliar with any axiomatic treatments of LISP s metalinguistic power. The rst structured operational semantics for LISP was de ned for M expression LISP by Gordon [Gor75] This was used as the basis for an induction principle for proving properties of LISP programs. One application ....
....case, 3 LISP. Apart from the similarity of the general frameworks there are many di erences. 2 LISP is a descendant of McCarthy s original coding algorithm but with additional structure superimposed on it. As a result 2 LISP is rather complicated and none of the subsequent treatments of re ection [FW84, FW86, DM88, Baw88] adopted it. Comparing speci c aspects, our representation function R corresponds to Smith s reifying up operator and the inverse function R 1 corresponds to Smith s down operator. In 2 LISP down and up are user operators and down depends on the termination of its argument. Thus down is not the ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
O. Danvy and K. Malmkjaer. Intensions and extensions in a re ective tower. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, pages 327{ 341, 1988.
M-LISP: A Representation-Independent Dialect of LISP with.. - Muller (1992) (Correct)
.... v , it is obviously not the case that reify [ 0 v is an extension (conservative or otherwise) of v . 23 5 Related Work While there are many studies of LISP with which we share either our general methodology [Gor75, BM75, Car76, Mas86, MT89, FFKD86, Fel88] or our general subject matter [Pit80, MP80, Smi82, Smi84, RS84, FW84, FW86, DM88, Baw88], we are unfamiliar with any attempts to axiomatize LISP s metalinguistic facilities. We are also unfamiliar with any reference in the literature to the problematic nature of equation (12) in McCarthy s original representation function. 5.1 Gordon The rst structured operational semantics for ....
....the more widely noted re ective 3 LISP. In 2 LISP Smith attempts to reconcile the notions of evaluation and reduction in pure Scheme. Although it is generally agreed that this is a worthwhile goal, Smith s solution in 2 LISP was rather complicated and none of the subsequent treatments of re ection [FW84, FW86, DM88] adopted it. 2 LISP is yet another descendant of McCarthy s problematic coding algorithm but with additional structure superimposed on it. Comparing speci c aspects of M LISP and 2 LISP, our representation function R corresponds to Smith s reifying up operator and its inverse R 1 corresponds to ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Olivier Danvy and Katherine Malmkjaer. Intensions and extensions in a re ective tower. In Proceedings of the 1988 ACM Conference on LISP and Functional Programming, pages 327-341, 1988. 26
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC