KELSEY, R., CLINGER, W. D., AND REES, J. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33, 9 (Sept. 1998), 26--76.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....such type systems are used in intermediate and even low level languages. For continuations, there are two quite di#erent levels at which types can play a role: the source and the target language of the CPS transform. Types for continuation operators in the source, such as call cc in Scheme [16], were proposed by Gri#n [12] and incorporated into the New Jersey dialect of Standard ML [9] A further refinement of types is given by type and e#ect systems, as in the FX programming language, which superimposes a type and e#ect [17] discipline on a Scheme like language. While this e#ect system ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

....a document information item of the Infoset. Its only child element is the root element of the XML document. 2] Element ( name annot attributes child of element ) 3] annot attributes : attribute annotations [4] attribute : name value annotations [5] child of element : Element character data PI comment entity These are the basic constructs of SXML. 6] PI ( PI pi target annotations processing instruction content string ) The XML Recommendation specifies that processing instructions (PI) are distinct ....

....targets of processing instructions, etc. may be distinguished solely by their case. These names however are represented as Scheme identifiers in SXML. Although Scheme is traditionally a case insensitive language, the use of Scheme symbols for XML names poses no contradictions. According to R5RS [5], symbol string symbol) returns the name of symbol as a string. If the symbol was part of an object returned as the value of a literal expression (section 4.1.2) or by a call to the read procedure, and its name contains alphabetic characters, then the string returned will contain characters ....

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, J. Rees (eds.), Revised5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, No. 1, September, 1998.

....trims all leading and trailing whitespace. 2.7 Custom tags ETL allows custom tags to define new abstractions only in terms of built in primitives. The mechanism ETL provides is based on abstract syntax tree (AST) rewriting similar to Scheme s hygienic macros and other syntactic macro systems [32, 1]. Given that the AST of an ETL template is simply the XML source code itself, we simply use XSLT to describe the rewrite rules (see Fig. 7) Those rules are then applied to the source template thus reducing that code to contain only the core language. That reduced template is then byte compiled ....

W. C. Richard Kelsey and J. Rees. Revised 5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme, February 1998.

....to output Java code. To enable AST rewriting, we have used PPG to extend Polyglot s Java parser with the ability to generate an AST from a string of Java code and a collection of AST nodes to substitute into the generated AST. This feature provides many of the benefits of quasiquoting in Scheme [19]. 5 Experience More than a dozen extensions of varying sizes have been implemented using Polyglot, for example: Jif is a Java extension that provides information flow control and features to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of data [25] Jif split is an extension to Jif that ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (editors). Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, October 1998. Available at http://www.schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS.

....in such a setting. 5. 1 A monad for continuations Traditionally, continuation passing style (CPS) has been used to model jumps in programming languages [90] Continuations provide an extremely powerful e#ect, especially first class continuations as supported by SML of New Jersey and Scheme [31, 44], hence e#ective use of continuations require great care: As demonstrated by Thielecke, many seemingly obvious equivalences fail to hold in the presence of a call by current continuation construct [84] We will see a particular example related to recursion in Section 5.3. Computations based on ....

....letrec x = callcc (#c. True, c) let x = callcc (#c. True, c) Intuitively, letrec x = A in B in Scheme is implemented by allocating a cell called x with a bogus error value, computing the value of the expression A (with x in scope) and then overwriting the cell x with the result [44]. This allocate compute overwrite paradigm practically achieves the knot tying implementation of recursion. The evaluation then goes on with the expression B, again with x in scope. A simple let binding, on the other hand, does not create a cell to start with: let x = A in B is interpreted by ....

Kelsey, R., Clinger, W., and Rees, J. (Editors.) Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33, 9 (Sept. 1998), 26--76. (58, 63)

....m cons operations, and m closures for their solution and for Bird s solution [2] In contrast, our solution requires m hd operations if m is even and m 1 if m is odd, 2m tl operations, 0 cons operations, and 0 closures. In Appendix B, we reproduce the code of our solution in Scheme [9]. This code does not use pattern matching and thus it makes explicit all the occurrences of the hd and tl operations (i.e. in Scheme, car and cdr) 8 5 Conclusion and issues Processing a list does not merely reduce to traversing it iteratively. A recursive descent provides just enough ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

....such type systems are used in intermediate and even low level languages. For continuations, there are two quite different levels at which types can play a role: the source and the target language of the CPS transform. Types for continuation operators in the source, such as call cc in Scheme [16], were proposed by Griffin [12] and incorporated into the New Jersey dialect of Standard ML [9] A further refinement of types is given by type and effect systems, as in the FX programming language, which super imposes a type and effect [17] discipline on a Scheme like language. While this effect ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7 105, 1998.

....on the core program. Section 4 describes its KMP instances and Section 5 describes its Boyer and Moore instances. Related work is reviewed in Section 6 and Section 7 concludes. A correctness proof of the core program can be found in Appendix A. Throughout, we use the programming language Scheme [37], or, more precisely, Petite Chez Scheme (www.scheme.com) and the partial evaluator Similix [11, 12] 2 The abstracted string matcher We first specify the operations on the cache (Section 2.1) Then we describe the cache based string matcher (Section 2.2) 2.1 The cache and its operations The ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

....therefore unnecessary to have any other combiner constructors in the language, provided one is willing to accept that all constructed combiners will be applicative. lambda was the only combiner constructor in the original description of Lisp [McC60] and it is or rather was, until quite recently [KeClRe98] the only combiner constructor in Scheme. It is of particular interest here that Scheme had only one call mechanism for compound combiners, the one being used by compound applicatives constructed via lambda , as this singularity appears to be an important element of the elegance for which the ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors, \Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme", 20 February 1998. Available http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/projects/scheme/index.html

.... notes [11] In addition, we distinguish between the Knuth Morris Pratt matcher and the Morris Pratt matcher in that the former uses one character of negative information whereas the latter does not [7] Our string matchers are expressed in a first order subset of the Scheme programming language [23]. They are specialized using polyvariant program point specialization [6, 27] where certain source program points (specialization points) are indexed with static values and kept in a seen before list (i.e. memoized) and residual program points are mutually recursive functions. In the rest of ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

....In the remaining parts of the paper we will in a systematic way discuss a number of issues that must be considered when XML is subsumed in a given programming language. As the concrete background of our work, we draw on the experiences from the LAML project, in which XML is subsumed in Scheme [9]. LAML details are not reported in this paper, however. The interested reader will have to consult one of the papers on LAML [17, 16] 2 Issues The issues involved in subsuming XML notation in a given programming language will be discussed in a bottom up fashion. We start with the lexical and ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7-105, August 1998.

....It is becoming widely recognized that the ability to manipulate delimited continuations [6] in (functional) programming languages matters both in principle and in practice. In contrast to the unlimited continuations provided by call withcurrent continuation (or call cc for short) in Scheme [17], delimited continuations are only captured up to an enclosing control delimiter. The rst class use of delimited continuations provides us with strong control over abstracting and composing a part of continuations without explicitly converting the whole program into a continuation passing style ....

Kelsey, R., W. Clinger, and J. Rees (editors) \Revised 5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme," Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 7-105, Kluwer Academic Publishers (August 1998).

....type instantiations as the MLj compiler does [2] the precision of type inference may possibly improve and so may the e# ciency of the resulting translation. It remains to see whether or when doing so pays for its cost. 7. 2 Tail Call Optimization Report on the Algotithmic Language Scheme [8] requires proper implementation of tail recursion. However, it usually needs low level stack manipulations, which JVM does not allow. Nevertheless, there are several approaches to implementing tail recursion or, more generally, tail call optimization within the framework of Java. Kawa [3] and MLj ....

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees (editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, 1998.

.... PGG System User Manual Peter Thiemann Universit at Freiburg thiemann informatik.uni freiburg.de March 13, 2000 1 Introduction The PGG system is a partial evaluation system for the full Scheme language as de ned in the R5RS report [19]. It has the following features o ine partial evaluation using the cogen approach; correct specialization of imperative code; side e ects performed at specialization time; modular specialization; no restrictions on primitives and static inputs (they are not restricted to have ....

....it is a representation of the binding time annotated program. Besides standard Scheme constructs it contains the following kinds of expressions, most of which are implemented as macros in module pgg library. The semantics of the ellipsis . is the same as in the syntax rules patterns of Scheme [19], zero or more repetitions of the preceding item. The list is sorted alphabetically. multi memo level fname fct bts args) denotes a memoization point at level level, fname is a symbol specifying the name of the generating function to run, fct is the function itself, bts is a list of binding ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7-105, 1998.

....a substantial fraction of the cost of copying and scanning a pair in the hybrid ROF collector. This cost would be less significant in languages like Java. 4 Larceny and its Collectors This section describes our Larceny implementation of Scheme and some characteristics of its garbage collectors [8, 16, 17, 23, 25]. 4.1 Compiler Larceny uses the Twobit optimizing compiler to compile Scheme to SPARC machine code. Previous measurements have established that Twobit and Larceny together have performance that is roughly competitive with Standard ML of New Jersey and with commercial Common Lisp and Scheme ....

....the same amount of data computing all permutations of 8 things 200 times and have the same peak live size, but differ in the lifetime of the data: the former removes one datum from the queue on every iteration, the latter removes eight. twobit is the Twobit optimizing compiler for Scheme [8, 25]. It is a typical old style Lisp program: lists are used to represent many data structures, and most of the objects allocated are pairs. twobit creates graph representations of the program being compiled and then annotates and updates those representations using side effects. twobit is run in two ....

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (editors). Revised 5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33(9), September 1998, pages 26--76.

No context found.

KELSEY, R., CLINGER, W. D., AND REES, J. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33, 9 (Sept. 1998), 26--76.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, J. Rees (eds.). Revised5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, No. 1, September, 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (Editors). Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26-76, 1998. 135

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (Editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, September 1998. With H. Abelson, N. I. Adams, IV, D. H. Bartley, G. Brooks, R. K. Dybvig, D. P. Friedman, R. Halstead, C. Hanson, C. T. Haynes, E. Kohlbecker, D. Oxley, K. M. Pitman, G. J. Rozas, G. L. Steele, Jr., G. J. Sussman, and M. Wand. 15

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger & J. Rees (eds.), Revised 5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme, HOSC, 11, 7-105, 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees, editors. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, J. Rees (eds.). Revised5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, No. 1, September, 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William D. Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language scheme. SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26-76, 1998.

No context found.

Kelsey, R., Clinger, W., Rees J. (eds.): Revised5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. J. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, No. 1, September 1998

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. R. (Eds.). Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), August 1998.

No context found.

Kelsey, R., W. Clinger and J. Rees (Editors). Revised report of the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7-105, 1998. Also appears in ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33(9), September 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7-105, August 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998. Also appears in ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33(9), September 1998.

No context found.

Kelsey, R., Clinger, W., (Editors), J.R.: Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33 (1998) 26-76

No context found.

Kelsey, R., Clinger, W., and (Editors), J. R. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33, 9 (Sept. 1998), 26--76.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9), Oct. 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (Editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. R. (Editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, Sept. 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, Clinger W., J. Rees, et al. Revised report on the algorithmic language scheme. Journal of Higher Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7-105, 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), August 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, J. Rees, et al. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(6):26--76, September 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. R. (Editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, 1998.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees. The Revised 5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), September 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonatan Rees (Editors). Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, September 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (eds.). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), September 1998. 21

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (Editors). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 33(9):26--76, September 1998. URL ftp: //ftp.cs.indiana.edu/pub/scheme-repository/doc/standards/r5rs-html.tar.gz.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language scheme. Technical report, February 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees, editors. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998. Also appears in ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33(9), September 1998.

No context found.

Kelsey, R., W. Clinger, and J. R. (Editors): 1998, `Revised Report of the Algorithmic Language Scheme'. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 33(9), 26--76.

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees, editors. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

No context found.

Kelsey, R., W. Clinger and J. Rees. Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), August 1998. 117

No context found.

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees, editors. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language Scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(1):7--105, 1998.

No context found.

Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees (eds.). Revised report on the algorithmic language Scheme. HigherOrder and Symbolic Computation, 11(1), September 1998.

First 50 documents  Next 50

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