Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, Proc. ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, Springer-Verlag, 1990.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....(1) is a process which inputs a value of type t on channel c and applies to it the function f . This process will be well typed only in an environment in which the channel c has the capability to input values of type t, written c : t) and f denotes a function of type (t proc) here, as in [13, 37, 50], we use proc to denote the type of processes. As usual we allow as values arbitrary abstractions, but much of the descriptive power of lp v comes from the ability to form values by abstracting over processes. For example (unit proc) is the type of thunked processes; we use this type so ....

....we have: D sServ(req) j Client(req) req : t l ) Observe that the type t l = P(x : s s ] which annotates y in the client prevents dangerous code being input via r. If we only have a constant process type proc, as in the previous typing system of the process calculi [50, 37, 13], then the client could input any function l(x : s)Q, where Q is an arbitrary process; such incoming code may harm the client s resources. Example 4.4. Interface server and mobile client code) We revisit Example 2.3, where clients send scripts to a general interface which acts as an interface ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, Proc. ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, SpringerVerlag, 1990.

....is a process which inputs a value of type t on channel c and applies to it the function f . This process will be well typed only in an environment in which the channel c has the capability to input values of type t, written c : t) I , and f denotes a function of type (t proc) here, as in [13, 37, 50], we use proc to denote the type of processes. 1 Nobuko Yoshida, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, England. E mail: ny11 mcs.le.ac.uk 2 Matthew Hennessy, Computer Science, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of ....

....j Client(req) req : t l ) O ) IO ; D c ] Observe that the type t l def = P(x : s I s ) x : s I s ] which annotates y in the client prevents dangerous code being input via r. If we only have a constant process type proc, as in the previous typing system of the process calculi [50, 37, 13], then the client could input any function l(x : s)Q, where Q is an arbitrary process; such incoming code may harm the client s resources. 2 EXAMPLE 4.4. Interface server and mobile client code) We revisit Example 2.3, where clients send scripts to a general interface which acts as an interface ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, Proc. ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....unicity of the mathematical semantics. This is especially compelling when combinations of different features induce an intricate syntax. In particular the development of functional languages endowed with primitives for parallelism and concurrency, like Concurrent Clean [33] CML [36] and FACILE [16, 17], calls for a mathematical treatment of functions and their extensions to sets of values (for a survey about the subject see e.g. 39] The aim is to give a semantics more abstract than term models, and logical principles to reason about programs. When dealing with these problems, it is usual ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, S. Prasad, "Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming", LNCS 443, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990, 765-779.

.... of a higher order p calculus in which values, including process terms, can be exchanged along communication channels [3, 29, 35] We believe that our typing system based on fine grained process types can be readily adapted to related location based distributed calculi such as those presented in [6, 4, 9, 11, 15, 33]. Higher Order Processes The language we consider, lp v , is essentially a call by value l calculus augmented with the p calculus primitives [22] For example, c (x : t) f x (1) is a process which inputs a value of type t on channel c and applies to it the function f . This process will be ....

....(1) is a process which inputs a value of type t on channel c and applies to it the function f . This process will be well typed only in an environment in which the channel c has the capability to input values of type t, written c : t) I , and f denotes a function of type (t proc) here, as in [11, 26, 35], we use proc to denote the type of processes. As usual we allow as values arbitrary abstractions, but much of the descriptive power of lp v comes from the ability to form values by abstracting over processes. For example (unit proc) is the type of thunked processes; we use this type so ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, SpringerVerlag, 1990.

....(1) is a process which inputs a value of type t on channel c and applies to it the function f . This process will be well typed only in an environment in which the channel c has the capability to input values of type t, written c : t) I , and f denotes a function of type (t proc) here, as in [10, 33, 46], we use proc to denote the type of processes. 1 Nobuko Yoshida, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, England. E mail: ny11 mcs.le.ac.uk 2 Matthew Hennessy, Computer Science, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of ....

....j Client(req) req : t l ) O ) IO ; D c ] Observe that the type t l def = x : s I s ) x : s I s ] which annotates X in the client prevents dangerous code being input via r. If we only have a constant process type proc, as in the previous typing system of the process calculi [46, 33, 10], then the client could input any function l(x : s)Q, where Q an arbitrary process; such incoming code may harm the client s resources. 2 EXAMPLE 4.3. Interface server and mobile client code) We revisit Example 2.3, where clients send scripts to a general interface which acts as an interface for ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, Proc. ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....However, apart from being safe languages in the above sense, the mentioned languages are rather traditional, based on the object oriented paradigm and or traditional imperative scripting language techniques, thus these languages offer very little support for the analysis of systems. Facile [9, 10, 18, 21] is a viable alternative to the above mentioned languages. Facile is a multi paradigm programming language combining functional and concurrent programming. The language is conceived for programming of reactive systems and distributed systems, in particular the construction of systems based on the ....

....managed. Communication is synchronous. The functional and the concurrent parts of Facile are strongly integrated: processes evaluate expressions to values while expressions may activate processes or return channels and node identifiers. The semantics of Facile has been studied quite extensively [9, 10, 18, 12, 2], either focusing on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems, reduction systems or abstract machines, or being concerned with the development of program equivalences. So far the approach to semantics for Facile has been based on the interleaving approach to ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....we also report relabelling functions for locality, precedence and enabling. Our proposal is robust, as it applies to higher order calculi such as HO [24] or Plain CHOCS [26] with little or no changes. Also, we consider a version of the spawn operation used in languages such as Facile [10] or CML [23, 18] It creates a new processor on which the spawn process is executed independently of the existing ones. Again, no change is needed, although spawn affects the parallel structure of the system. Finally, we compare our semantics with other causal semantics presented in the literature ....

....Higher Order Mobile Processes Recently, some higher order calculi have been defined for modelling mobile systems. In these calculi, names are allowed to represent processes. A communication may cause processes to migrate. Examples are higher order calculus (HO ) 24] Plain CHOCS [26] Facile [10], and CML [23, 18] We consider here HO extended with the spawn(P) operation of Facile and CML, and show the stability of our approach to the semantics of mobile processes. We extend the syntax of calculus as follows. Let V be a set of process variables ranged over by X;Y; Let K stand ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....However, apart from being safe languages in the above sense, the mentioned languages are rather traditional, based on the object oriented paradigm and or traditional imperative scripting language techniques, thus these languages offer very little support for the analysis of systems. Facile [15, 16, 30, 32] is a viable alternative to the above mentioned languages. Facile is a multi paradigm programming language combining functional and concurrent programming. The language is conceived for programming of reactive systems and distributed systems, in particular the construction of systems based on the ....

....managed. Communication is synchronous. The functional and the concurrent parts of Facile are strongly integrated: processes evaluate expressions to values while expressions may activate processes or return channels and node identifiers. The semantics of Facile has been studied quite extensively [15, 16, 30, 20, 2], either focusing on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems, reduction systems or abstract machines, or being concerned with the development of program equivalences. So far the approach to semantics for Facile has been based on the interleaving approach to ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....communication becomes Q j P . Since the place holder X is already present in the receiver and becomes P , we can apply the machinery described so far for first order calculus, without any change. Quite similar is the treatment for CHOCS [23] and for the spawn operations of languages like FACILE [11] or CML [15] This argument shows the stability of our approach to a parametric semantics of mobile processes. ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....in terms of a notion of dynamic types . There is also no result corresponding to the previous Theorem, the full abstraction result, as there is no behavioural semantics given for cv . There has also been some related work on higher order processes languages such as CHOCS , 20] and FACILE , [5]. Again here the main theoretical emphasis has been on the development of operational semantics in terms of labelled transition systems and to a certain extent the investigation of appropriate versions of bisimulation equivalence for these languages. Another strand of research has been on the ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mistra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings of ICALP 90, volume 443 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....of the derivation trees of transitions in their labels. This information allows us to easily recover non interleaving semantics for Facile by looking only at the labels of transitions. This semantics may be instantiated to recover both causality and locality information. 1 Introduction Facile [9, 10, 14, 15, 16] is a multi paradigm programming language combining functional and concurrent programming. The language is conceived for programming reactive systems and distributed systems. In particular Facile supports the construction of systems based on the emerging mobile agent principle since processes and ....

....managed. Communication is synchronous. The functional and the concurrent parts of Facile are strongly integrated: processes evaluate expressions to values while expressions may activate processes or return channels and node identifiers. The semantics of Facile has been studied quite extensively [9, 10, 14, 11, 1], either focusing on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems, reduction systems or abstract machines, or being concerned with the development of program equivalences. So far the approach to semantics for Facile has been based on the interleaving approach to ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....However, apart from being safe languages in the above sense, the mentioned languages are rather traditional, based on the object oriented paradigm and or traditional imperative scripting language techniques, thus these languages offer very little support for the analysis of systems. Facile [10, 11, 19, 21] is a viable alternative to the above mentioned languages. Facile is a multi paradigm programming language combining functional and concurrent programming. The language is conceived for programming of reactive systems and distributed systems, in particular the construction of systems based on the ....

....managed. Communication is synchronous. The functional and the concurrent parts of Facile are strongly integrated: processes evaluate expressions to values while expressions may activate processes or return channels and node identifiers. The semantics of Facile has been studied quite extensively [10, 11, 19, 14, 2], focusing on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems, reduction systems or abstract machines or are concerned with the development of program equivalences. So far the approach to semantics for Facile has been based on the interleaving approach to modeling ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....However, apart from being safe languages in the above sense, the mentioned languages are rather traditional, based on the object oriented paradigm and or traditional imperative scripting language techniques, thus these languages offer very little support for the analysis of systems. Facile [9, 10, 17, 19] is a viable alternative to the above mentioned languages. Facile is a multi paradigm programming language combining functional and concurrent programming. The language is conceived for programming of reactive systems and distributed systems, in particular the construction of systems based on the ....

....managed. Communication is synchronous. The functional and the concurrent parts of Facile are strongly integrated: processes evaluate expressions to values while expressions may activate processes or return channels and node identifiers. The semantics of Facile has been studied quite extensively [9, 10, 17, 12, 2], focusing on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems, reduction systems or abstract machines or are concerned with the development of program equivalences. So far the approach to semantics for Facile has been based on the interleaving approach to modeling ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....We foresee no difficulty in adopting a different addressing mechanism, when a more basic description of the topology of the network is available. Actually, we only need to re define the router. Needless to say, our results can be easily transferred to real programming languages, like Facile [6, 14], that already has a proved operational semantics [2] or CML [8, 11] We hope that our proposal could help the design of language implementations, giving hints on how these can be made truly distributed, both with respect to control and to data. As they are, our extended names are quite ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....names at the same time. Our address composition is applied to all these names. This only entails homomorphically extending our address composition to processes, and our theory scales up smoothly. As a consequence, our model can easily be transferred to real programming languages, such as Facile [14, 28] or CML [19, 24] Roughly speaking, we define a distributed version of the calculus as far as data are concerned. The last two authors addressed the issue of non centralized control in [12] The two proposals can be merged, yielding a fully non interleaving description of the calculus and of ....

....relation R Gamma1 is built likewise. 8 Higher Order Mobile Processes Some higher order calculi have recently been defined for modelling mobile systems. A communication may cause processes to migrate. Examples of such calculi are the higher order calculus HO [25] Plain CHOCS [27] Facile [14], and CML [24, 19] We show the robustness of our approach to the semantics of mobile processes, by taking a late version of the HO calculus as a test bed. When a process P migrates, it exports all its names at the same time. We need to extend the notions on names introduced in Section 5 to ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....9 v 0 Delta c ; a v 0 a f v 0 ; a v c 1 Phi c 2 ; a v = c 1 ; a v) Phi enabled(a) c 2 ; a v) enabled(a) mode a 6j sleep Figure 1: Axioms of the Concurrency Monad 4. Related Work Probably the most influential concurrent functional programming languages are Cml [19] and Facile [8, 20]. However, neither of these languages separates the concurrent extensions from the pure functional kernel. They are, therefore, both inherently impure, as opposed to languages which encapsulate concurrency in monads. An important difference with respect to the communication model is that we use ....

....work presents an operational and a denotational semantics but does not, however, aim at an axiomatization by temporal observations, which we see as a key to the specification of concurrent programs. Traditional structured operational semantics (SOS) approaches have been applied to Cml [19] Facile [8], Concurrent Haskell [12] and also to our model [6] The temporal semantics presented here differs again in that these frameworks do not support specification. 5. Conclusion We have defined an extension of the usual I O monad by the paradigm of communicating agents, which allows smooth ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for facile: A symetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Int. Colloqium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), number 443 in LNCS, pages 765--780. Springer--Verlag, 1990.

....We foresee no difficulty in adopting a different addressing mechanism, when a more basic description of the topology of the network is available. Actually, we only need to re define the router. Needless to say, our results can be easily transferred to real programming languages, like Facile [6, 13], that already has a proved operational semantics [2] or CML [8, 11] We hope that our proposal could help the design of language implementations, giving hints on how these can be made truly distributed, both with respect to control and to data. As they are, our extended names are quite ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....computation rule, which allows us to revert to the calculus when considering computation alone. Gordon [18] presents four models of input output in functional language, using an operational semantics. His continuation passing model uses rules that are almost identical to ours in format. Facile [15, 16] is intended as a source language; it is specified by a compositional translation into core Facile, which is more like an intermediate language. Core Facile is based on a typed call by value calculus with channel based communications and a call cc operator. Amadio [1] gives translations between ....

Alessandro Giacalone, Prateek Mishra, and Sanjiva Prasad. Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming. In Proc. ICALP '90, volume 443 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 765--7780, Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York, 1990. Springer-Verlag.

....One has to investigate how concepts of higher order process calculi, e.g. like (Plain) CHOCS [Tho93] and HO [San93] can be transferred to the monadic concurrent functional setting. In these frameworks behavioural equivalence is defined via bisimulations on labelled transition systems. In [GMP90] a weak applicative higher order bisimulation that respects static scoping of local names has already been proposed for Facile. This bisimulation, however, posed several problems (e.g. congruence results, adequateness) The concept of weak higher order bisimulation was used with more success in ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for facile: A symetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Int. Colloqium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), number 443 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 765--780. Springer--Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1990.

....treat the communication primitives as uninterpreted constants. They use a small step semantics for both computation and communication, whereas we use a version of the instantaneous computation rule of [7] this allows us to stay within the calculus when considering computation alone. Facile [11, 12] is a source language whose semantics is given by a compositional translation into the intermediate language core Facile . Core Facile is based on the typed call by value calculus, with channel based communication and a call cc operator. In [1] Amadio gives translations between several versions ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proc. ICALP '90, volume 443 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 765--7780, Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York, 1990. Springer-Verlag.

....the new router homomorphically extends to processes our name router. Since all results proved for first order calculus are still valid for its higher order version, our theory scales up smoothly. As a consequence, our model can be easily transferred to real programming languages, like Facile [11, 22] or CML [13, 18] We hope that our proposal could help the design of language implementations, giving hints on how these can be made truly distributed, both with respect to control and to data. The paper is organized as follows. The next section briefly surveys calculus. Then, in Sect. 3 there ....

....is obvious. Similarly for R Gamma1 . 9 Higher Order Mobile Processes Recently, some higher order calculi have been defined for modelling mobile systems. A communication may cause processes to migrate. Among others, examples are higherorder calculus (HO ) 19] Plain CHOCS [21] Facile [11], and CML [18, 13] We show the robustness of our localized and distributed approach to the semantics of mobile processes, by taking as test bed a late version of HO calculus. When a process P migrates, it exports all its names at the same time. We need to extend the notions introduced in Sect. ....

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for Facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pages 765--780. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

....using such languages is that they offer integration of different computational paradigms in a clean and well understood programming model that will allow (formal) reasoning about program behaviour and properties. Over the past years several formal semantics for such languages have been proposed [3, 6, 13]. Most of these papers focus on defining the (abstract) execution of programs in terms of transition systems. This is clearly important for ensuring correct implementations of the languages. However, it is only the first step towards (formal) reasoning about program behaviour and properties. For ....

....However, it is only the first step towards (formal) reasoning about program behaviour and properties. For the next step it is necessary to have notions of observations and derive equivalences and laws for programs. As far as we are aware only Facile has been equipped with a notion of observation [6, 13]. However, the semantics and notion of observation proposed for Facile in [6] has several drawbacks. The semantics treats channels as generative constructs. To model this it is necessary to equip the structural operational semantics with a global component keeping track of generated channels. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, and S. Prasad. Operational and algebraic semantics for facile: A symmetric integration of concurrent and functional programming. In Proceedings of ICALP 90, LNCS 443. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

No context found.

Giacalone, A., Mistra, P. and Prasad, S., Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, Proc. ICALP'90, LNCS 443, pp.765--780, Springer-Verlag, 1990.

No context found.

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, S. Prasad, "Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming", LNCS 443, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990, 765-779.

No context found.

A. Giacalone, P. Mishra, & S. Prasad, Operational and Algebraic Semantics for Facile: A Symmetric Integration of Concurrent and Functional Programming, in Proceedings of ICALP 90, LNCS 443, pp. 765-780, 1990.

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