Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....a mixin composition of List with a record type which consists of the type binding T = List.this.T . This forces the element type of a list and its tail to be the same. In general, mixin composition with type bindings subsumes in expressive power the sharing constraints of SML module systems [28]. Class Nil provides all the abstract functions of its superclass List. For the implementation of head and tail we make use of a predefined value error that produces errors at run time when accessed. error is of any type. Even though our formal treatment does not include such a bottom type, ....

X. Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Portland, Oregon, 1994.

....be re elaborated. A more thorough comparison is difficult because MacQueen and Tofte employ a stamp based semantics, which is difficult to transfer to a type theoretic setting. Focusing on controlled abstraction, but largely neglecting higherorder modules, Harper and Lillibridge [11] and Leroy [14, 16] introduced the closely related concepts of translucent sums and manifest types. These mechanisms served as the basis of the module system in the revised Definition of Standard ML 1997 [23] and Harper and Stone [13] have formalized the elaboration of Standard ML 1997 programs into a translucent ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

....the complex number operators. The ability to include type components in modules makes this approach very powerful too powerful in fact to permit compile time type checking without careful restrictions and extensions to ensure a suitable phase distinction [7] and to support features like sharing [14]. Even then, it is still not possible to support true separate compilation [2] or to use modules as firstclass wlues [22, 12] Manifest types (transluscent sums) 6, 13] are an attempt to bridge the gap between the weak and strong sum approaches described above. A module type c = r. Complex c ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. In Record of the 1994.

....u and v = u end Figure 9: Encoding of the Avoidance Problem in O Caml MacQueen and Tofte employ a stamp based semantics, which is di#cult to transfer to a type theoretic setting. Focusing on controlled abstraction, but largely neglecting higher order modules, Harper and Lillibridge [9] and Leroy [12, 14] introduced the closely related concepts of translucent sums and manifest types. These mechanisms served as the basis of the module system in the revised Definition of Standard ML 1997 [20] and Harper and Stone [11] have formalized the elaboration of Standard ML 1997 programs into a translucent ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

....This problem involved abstract types defined in anonymous structure expressions, defined locally in let or local at the module level, or hidden by SML s transparent ascription (strexp : sigexp) This has been corrected by: 1. Restricting the EL to named form at the module level, following Leroy [Ler96] This can always be achieved by a simple prepass over the program. The grammar in Section 5 shows what we mean by named form. 7 2. In the case that let and local module forms define abstract types locally, in the translation we augment the bodies of these forms with extra hidden fields ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

....matches the signature of the functor s domain. Moreover, there appears to be no principled way of choosing between di#erent non dependent subtypes of a functor: as a result, these calculi fail to enjoy the principal (i.e. minimal) typing property. Another variant of these calculi, presented in [31], adopts a restricted grammar that only allows applications of functors to paths. Although this restriction seems to avoid the problem with principal types, it fails to capture Standard ML s ability to apply functors to anonymous arguments. In [31] Leroy proves an equivalence between his notion ....

....Another variant of these calculi, presented in [31] adopts a restricted grammar that only allows applications of functors to paths. Although this restriction seems to avoid the problem with principal types, it fails to capture Standard ML s ability to apply functors to anonymous arguments. In [31], Leroy proves an equivalence between his notion of type abstraction, relying on syntactic signatures, and Standard ML s notion of type generativity. The equivalence result only holds for a restricted grammar of Standard ML programs. To circumvent this restriction, Leroy specifies a rewriting ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):1---32, September 1996.

....be re elaborated. A more thorough comparison is di#cult because MacQueen and Tofte employ a stamp based semantics, which is di#cult to transfer to a type theoretic setting. Focusing on controlled abstraction, but largely neglecting higher order modules, Harper and Lillibridge [10] and Leroy [13, 15] introduced the closely related concepts of translucent sums and manifest types. These mechanisms served as the basis of the module system in the revised Definition of Standard ML 1997 [22] and Harper and Stone [12] have formalized the elaboration of Standard ML 1997 programs into a translucent ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

....be re elaborated. A more thorough comparison is difficult because MacQueen and Tofte employ a stamp based semantics, which is difficult to transfer to a type theoretic setting. Focusing on controlled abstraction, but largely neglecting higherorder modules, Harper and Lillibridge [11] and Leroy [14, 16] introduced the closely related concepts of translucent sums and manifest types. These mechanisms served as the basis of the module system in the revised Definition of Standard ML 1997 [23] and Harper and Stone [13] have formalized the elaboration of Standard ML 1997 programs into a translucent ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

....composition of List with a record type which consists of the type binding T = outer.T . This forces the element type of a list and its tail to be the same. In general, mixin composition with type bindings has an expressive power analogous to sharing constraints in SML module systems [Ler94] Class Nil provides all the abstract functions of its superclass List. For the implementation of head and tail we make use of a predefined value error that produces errors at run time when accessed. error is of any type. Even though our formal treatment does not include such a bottom type, ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Portland, Oregon, 1994.

....two or more structure arguments and those arguments have to interact within the functor body based on types that they share in common. This sharing has to be expressed in some way in the functor parameter signatures. See the various ML tutorials (e.g. 18] and textbooks for further details, and [19, 23, 24, 25, 38] for alternative theoretical approaches. 6 Object Oriented Programming It is hard to pin down the essence of object oriented programming, because there are many different feature sets, languages, and methodologies espoused by different camps within the OO community. One major division is ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):1--32, September 1996.

.... SosSet = struct type element = sos type set = MakeSetFn(SosKey) set ( Error: SosKey has wrong signature ) end ) Leroy s applicative functors were motivated by a desire to add type theoretic support to Standard ML for fully transparent higher order modules in the presence of abstraction [15]. Shao has also presented a type theory for higher order modules that extends applicative functors and solves the problems we encountered with applicative functors using fully syntactic signatures [24] In his system, the set type above would be expressed as MakeSetFn( type key = sos ) set, ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):1--32, September 1996.

.... SosSet = struct type element = sos type set = MakeSetFn(SosKey) set ( Error: SosKey has wrong signature ) end ) Leroy s applicative functors were motivated by a desire to add type theoretic support to Standard ML for fully transparent higher order modules in the presence of abstraction [15]. Shao has also presented a type theory for higher order modules that extends applicative functors and solves the problems we encountered with applicative functors using fully syntactic signatures [24] In his system, the set type above would be expressed as MakeSetFn(ftype key = sosg) set, ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):1-32, September 1996.

....two or more structures arguments and those arguments have to interact within the functor body based on types that they share in common. This sharing has to be expressed in some way in the functor parameter signatures. See the various ML tutorials (e.g. 17] and textbooks for further details, and [18, 22, 23, 24, 37] for alternative theoretical approaches. 21 6 Object Oriented Programming It is hard to pin down the essence of object oriented programming, because there are many different feature sets, languages, and methodologies espoused by different camps within the OO community. One major division is ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):1--32, September 1996.

....in [12] a view mecanism for this language has been proposed in [13] Several formalization of Standard ML and Ocaml modules have been proposed. Some are based on calculi with unique names [25, 23] others uses type theoretical concepts [17, 21] Both approaches are compared and related in [22, 31]. 59 60 CHAPTER 4. MIXING MODULES AND OBJECTS Appendix A Answers to exercices Exercise 1, page 20 let fact fact x = if x = 0 then 1 else x fact (x 1) let fact x = fix fact x; Exercise 3, page 21 The only diculty comes from the Joker card, which can be used in place of ant other ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667-698, 1996.

....complex number operators. The ability to include type components in modules makes this approach very powerful too powerful in fact to permit compile time type checking without careful restrictions and extensions to ensure a suitable phase distinction [7] and to support features like sharing [14]. Even then, it is still not possible to support true separate compilation [2] or to use modules as firstclass values [22, 12] ffl Manifest types (transluscent sums) 6, 13] are an attempt to bridge the gap between the weak and strong sum approaches described above. A module type 9c = Complex ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. In Record of the 1994 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on ML and its Applications, Orlando, FL, June 1994.

....of class types and implementation based inheritance. One minor issue is that XMOC requires that class names be unique in a program; this restriction can be avoided by introducing some mechanism, such as stamps, to distinguish top level names (e.g. see Leroy s approach to module system semantics [Ler96] We would also like to generalize the rule that relates class types with object types (rule 36 in Appendix C) to allow positive occurrences of #C to be replaced by the object type s bound type variable. While we believe that this generalization is sound, we have not yet proven it. ....

Leroy, X. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. JFP, 6(5), September 1996, pp. 1--32.

.... as Inner is parameterized, and the projections must be applied to the parameters: Trn (S p) R p) p) However, with implicit arguments, we can write (Trn p) 12 5 Manifest Signatures Programming language designers have long recognized the need to see through the signatures of modules; [11, 17, 13, 14, 9] give a taste of the relevant literature. I assume the reader is familiar with the two basic approaches, Pebble style sharing which uses pure abstraction and application, and manifest types in signatures, which requires some new explanation. I use the term manifest types, from [13] informally, ....

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, September 1996.

No context found.

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

No context found.

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

No context found.

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, 1996.

No context found.

Xavier Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667-698, 1996.

No context found.

X. Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Portland, Oregon, 1994.

No context found.

X. Leroy. A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming, 6(5):667--698, September 1996.

No context found.

Leroy, X. (1996). A syntactic theory of type generativity and sharing. Journal of Functional Programming 6 (5), 667--698.

First 50 documents

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