G.L. Steele. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....to the end, unless the condition becomes true, in which case the whole statement terminates. Once locking, achieving and job have terminated, either normally or abnormally, the statement: active tasks[this] state = TERMINATED; executes as part of modeling the LISP unwind protect construct [12]. The assignment restores the value of the state field in case the task was aborted by the daemon. The last statement in execute task releases the property from the lock table, but is abruptly terminated if the state field gets assigned the value ABORTED, which occurs if the daemon discovers a ....

G. L. Steele. Common LISP -- The Language. Digital Press, 1990. Second edition. The unwind-protect construct is described on page 188. 21

....as letter trees, or tries [Knuth, 1973] which re quire that each character of a word be examined only once during a lookup. 5 Performance In this section, we detail how our tagger meets the desider ata that we outlined in section 1. 5. 1 Efficient The system is implemented in Common Lisp [Steele, 1990]. All timings reported are for a Sun SPARCStation2. The English lexicon used contains 38 tags (M 38) and 174 ambiguity classes (N = 174) Training was performed on 25,000 words in articles selected randomly from Grolier s Encyclopedia. Five iterations of training were performed in a total time ....

G. L. Steele, Jr. Common Lisp, The Lan- guage. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....reduces the cost of dynamic compilation; because it has no compiler support, dcg must do runtime analysis. Finally, by making dynamic code generation a first class capability of a high level language, both profiling and debugging facilities can be added. Many languages, such as most Lisp dialects [17, 16] and Perl [19] provide an eval operation that allows code to be generated dynamically. This approach is extremely flexible but, unfortunately, comes at a high price: since these languages are dynamically typed, little code generation cost can be pushed to compile time. Many of the language ....

G.L. Steele Jr. Common Lisp. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....or data models such as ORION [23, 24, 22] TELOS [36, 35] SHOOD [10, 11] or VODAK [18, 26, 27] support it as rst level primitive. In this paper, we present an implementation for aggregation in the Common Lisp Object System [2] which is a dynamic object oriented extension to Common Lisp [42]. CLOS is a metacircular system, its behavior is characterized by a set of CLOS classes, instances, generic functions and methods its own metaobject classes. In a few words, a metaobject is an ordinary class viewed as an object at a metalevel. Classes of metaobjects are generally called ....

G. Steele. Common Lisp, The language, Second Edition. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....for list processing. Lisp gives a clean mechanism for storing information when that information could be data or functions for evaluation: both have symbols to identify them. In Lisp, there is no distinction between the different types of objects which the symbols represent, at the user level. [9] Internally to the design of a Lisp system, the data structures for storing variables and functions can be the same. In this implementation design for Lisp, the information describing the data objects in Lisp terminology is stored in the same way a user would store the information: in ....

Steele, G.L.,Jr. Common Lisp, Second Edition, Digital Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990, pp. 12-13, 238-246, 247-287.

....eval (evaluate something from the memory) rd (read in and copy from the memory) and two predicates, inp and rdp, which do not wait for data. See [CARR 88] ffl message The structure of messages for message passing and distributed processing are grouples. The actual syntax will be the Common Lisp[STEE 90] programming language syntax 80 since grouples are a hierarchical data structure and do not lend easily to transmission in that form. ffl MOSES Meta Operating System and Entity Shell: a project initiated by Daniel Pezely to develop an implementation of the VEOS design at HITL. ffl native ....

Steele, G.L.,Jr. Common Lisp, Second Edition, Digital Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990, pp. 12-13, 238-246, 247-287.

....the task is aborted by the daemon the whole operation terminates. Once the locking, achieving and job has been terminated, either normally or abnormally, the statement: active tasks[this] state = TERMINATED; is executed. This is part of the modeling of the LISP unwind protect construct, see [12]. The purpose of the assignment is to restore the value of the state field in case the task was aborted by the daemon and this field was assigned the value ABORTED. Restoring means assigning a value different from ABORTED, since this value will result in an immediate termination of the next ....

G. L. Steele. Common LISP -- The Language. Digital Press, 1990. Second edition. The unwind-protect construct is described on page 188. 22

....with a dynamic language as LISP. The major reasons are : 24 avril 1996 2 . Modelling : A powerful object language is more appropriate to model a domain close to the reality. With Power Classes, we used single and multiple inheritance, relations between classes, demons on slots. As in CLOS [Steele90], the Meta Object Protocol allows to customize the object oriented language, we used it for the allocation of some classes. Simplicity and flexibility : One of the advantages of LISP lies in the fact that development is fast, because we do not have to worry about pointers, memory allocation, ....

: G. L. Steele JR. Common Lisp, the language. Second Edition.

....(an operation called view ) An Example We have implemented a version of Snippet Search which realizes the strategy just outlined. In particular, Snippet Search is one of the search modes supported by the Text Database architecture (TDB) 10] a software artifact implemented in Common Lisp [29] which is directed towards fast prototyping of retrieval systems. A user interface to TDB, known as the Text Browser, uses the Interlisp D [7] window system to present a multi paradigm text search and retrieval tool (see figure 1) Currently, two search modes are supported over the same corpus, ....

G. L. Steele, Jr. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....in Section 6. 2 Related Work Dynamic code generation has a long history [29] It has been used to increase the performance of operating systems [2, 16, 39, 40] windowing operations [36] dynamically typed languages [7, 12, 26] and simulators [48, 46] Many languages, such as most Lisp dialects [41, 43], Tcl [35] and Perl [47] provide an eval operation that allows code to be generated dynamically. This approach is extremely flexible but, unfortunately, comes at a high price: since these languages are dynamically typed, little code generation cost can be pushed to compile time. Keppel ....

G.L. Steele Jr. Common Lisp. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....as letter trees, or tries [ Knuth, 1973 ] which require that each character of a word be examined only once during a lookup. 5 Performance In this section, we detail how our tagger meets the desiderata that we outlined in section 1. 5. 1 Efficient The system is implemented in Common Lisp [ Steele, 1990 ] All timings reported are for a Sun SPARCStation2. The English lexicon used contains 38 tags (M = 38) and 174 ambiguity classes (N = 174) Training was performed on 25,000 words in articles selected randomly from Grolier s Encyclopedia. Five iterations of training were performed in a total time ....

G. L. Steele, Jr. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....cost of dynamic compilation; because it has no compiler support, DCG must do runtime analysis. Finally, because we have made dynamic code generation a first class capability of a high level language, both profiling and debugging facilities can be added. Many languages, such as most Lisp dialects [29, 32], Tcl [25] and Perl [35] provide an eval operation that allows code to be generated dynamically. This approach is extremely flexible but, unfortunately, comes at a high price: since these languages are dynamically typed, little code generation cost can be pushed to compile time. Many of the ....

G.L. Steele Jr. Common Lisp. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....how this architecture can be implemented using objectoriented techniques, focusing on the definition of protocols through the appropriate attachment of methods to class objects. Accompanying the text is a simple, demonstration implementation of the suggested design, written in Common Lisp [22]. Since the emphasis is on architecture not algorithms, the demonstration system is unencumbered with optimized module implementations; interconnections are emphasized rather than specific functions. We note in the text where improved algorithms are appropriate. Nonetheless, the demonstration ....

G. L. Steele, Jr. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....is to further lower the cost of code generation. Employing VCODE [6] to generate code dynamically, tcc eschews the overhead of maintaining complex data structures such as DCG s intermediate representation (based on the IR of lcc [12] at run time. Many languages, such as most Lisp dialects [20, 22], Tcl [16] and Perl [24] provide an eval operation that allows code to be generated dynamically. This approach is flexible but has a high run time cost, since these languages are dynamically typed. Consel and No el [3] describe a technique for specializing programs with respect to run time ....

G.L. Steele Jr. Common Lisp. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....This is especially true when a theorem prover is to be embedded in an existing system, with its own data structures. Tools that solve the wrong problem would be of little use. 3 The KEIM Toolbox KEIM version 1. 2 [3] is implemented in Common Lisp, using the Common Lisp Object System (CLOS) [5]. CLOS allows great flexibility in the integration of new classes of objects. The generic function paradigm allows one to specialize the behavior of a function on a new type of object without changing its behavior on existing objects and without having to rewrite or copy existing and unrelated ....

G. Steele: Common Lisp, second edition. Digital Press, Boston, 1990.

....however, disrupts the flavor and benefits of lexical scoping. Curtis and Rauen recently proposed a module system designed for large scale programming in Scheme [3] Their system supports more general interface specifications than IMP, but does not address interactive programming. Common Lisp s [11] package system uses symbol tables to represent modules. Symbols defined as external in a package can be exported. Various mechanisms are available to access or to import exported symbols. The package system could be used as the low level implementation for fully developed (static) modules. ....

Guy L. Steele Jr. Common Lisp. Digital Press, 1990. Second Edition.

....since it is unclear how the shared portion of different first class environment should be combined when imported in a module. 3. It is unclear how first class environments can be used to support recursive modules or to allow referencing a first class environment before it is created. Common Lisp s [66] package system uses symbol tables to represent modules. Symbols defined as external in a package can be exported. Various mechanisms are available to access or to import exported symbols. However, packages are low level implementation concepts and provide much weaker expressive power for name ....

Steele Jr, G. L. Common Lisp. Digital Press, 1990. Second Edition.

No context found.

G. Steele Jr. Common Lisp, the Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

....expression into an equivalent safe form. In this section, we describe in greater detail the relationship between LISP and lambda calculus schemata. Before proceeding, we need to clarify what we mean by LISP . Pure LISP, and various dialects such as LISP 1. 5 [21] MACLISP [22] and Common LISP [34], all share a common core, but there are significant di#erences with respect to crucial issues of variable binding strategy and evaluation rules. For example, if F is a variable bound to a function, MACLISP allows the application (F 3) whereas Common LISP requires one to write (FUNCALL F 3) ....

Steele Jr., Guy L. Common LISP. Digital Press, second edition (1990).

....has been invoked most recently. Thus, entry and exit provide a barrier between the computation performed by body and computations performed outside body. This barrier may be used to set up state variables or objects external to the Scheme system that are needed only within body. Common Lisp [2] provides a similar form, unwind protect, which allows an exit handler to be established within its body. There is no need for an entry handler since Common Lisp continuations are not first class and can be used only for nonlocal exits. Control filters provide similar capability in a system with ....

Steele Jr., Guy L. Common Lisp, the Language. Digital Press, second edition (1990).

No context found.

G.L. Steele. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

No context found.

G. Steele Jr. Common Lisp, the Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

No context found.

G.L. Steele. Common Lisp, The Language. Digital Press, second edition, 1990.

No context found.

Steele, Jr. G. COMMON LISP, the Language. Second edition, Burlington, Massachusetts, Digital Press, 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