Martin C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1987. 166  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... e in f(n) steps reduces to e ## when evaluated using s where e ## is more defined than e # (for instance we could have e ## = c(c(x) and e # = c(g(x) with c being a constructor symbol and g being a function This is often considered the recipe for how to ensure total correctness, as e.g. in [Hen87, p. 183] 124 symbol) The steps are assumed to be parallel outermost steps (resembling normal order evaluation) No proofs (or references to such) are given of the abovementioned fact but the content is rather close to theorem 4.6.3. In [Kot85] identical to the technical report ....

Martin C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987.

..... 62 10.1.4 Lemma H.5 . 63 1 Introduction An often cited advantage of functional programming languages is that they are supposed to be easier to reason about than imperative languages [BW88, p1] PJ87, p1] Bd87, p23] BJLM91, p17] Hen87, pp6 7] Dav92, p5] with the property of referential transparency getting a prominent mention and the notion of side e#ect being deprecated all round. For a long time, a major disadvantage of functional programming languages was their inability to adequately handle features where side e#ects are ....

M.C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Computer Science Texts. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987.

....about semantics. However, they also have further advantages for parallel computation. In particular, functional programs contain far fewer constraints on execution order than do their imperative counterparts. This is because all expressions in a functional program are referentially transparent [4]. Therefore, the order of their execution cannot affect the result of the execution, and this increases the scope for parallel execution. Consequently, a number of parallel functional programming systems have been developed over the last 20 years [5 7] to attempt to exploit these advantages. ....

Henson, M.C., Elements of Functional Languages. 1987: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

....We also show that the notion of downwards accumulation developed by Gibbons is subsumed by our notion of accumulation. 1 Introduction often called accumulators [20, 5, 15] In functional programming, the notion of accumulation is usually associated with the so called accumulation technique [8, 4, 18, 3], which transforms recursive definitions by the introduction of additional arguments over which intermediate results are computed. The accumulation technique is strongly connected with the familiar procedure of generalization for induction that arises in the field of theorem proving [7, 1, 26] A ....

....Then it is necessary to modify generalize the induction hypothesis before starting the proof. This situation often appears during program verification, for instance, when a given program is proved to satisfy its formal specification, a procedure that in general requires induction (see e.g. [18, 30]) In this paper, we present a definition of accumulations that works uniformly for any inductive type. The kind of accumulations we have in mind are those that pass information down to the recursive calls. This paper follows up on an initial proposal presented in [28] A drawback of the version ....

M.C. Henson. Elements of Functional Programming. Computer Science Texts. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987.

..... 62 10.1.4 Lemma H.5 . 63 1 Introduction An often cited advantage of functional programming languages is that they are supposed to be easier to reason about than imperative languages [BW88, p1] PJ87, p1] Bd87, p23] BJLM91, p17] Hen87, pp6 7] Dav92, p5] with the property of referential transparency getting a prominent mention and the notion of side e#ect being deprecated all round. For a long time, a major disadvantage of functional programming languages was their inability to adequately handle features where side e#ects are ....

M.C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Computer Science Texts. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987.

....artificial. 3. The Transition Rule of the extended secd machine J is given an operational semantics by extending the secd machine from The mechanical evaluation of expressions [9] Introductions to the basic secd machine without J can also be found in many functional programming textbooks [5, 7, 17]. Landin s original definition (on page 16) however, is somewhat incomplete, as pointed out by Felleisen [3] These omissions were tacitly corrected by Burge in his textbook [1] which uses the secd machine, including J, as a foundation. For historical accuracy, the editors of this special issue ....

Martin C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1987.

....the straightforward transformational tradition, motivated by the well known problems of unrestricted folding, which restrict the use of folding to circumstances in which well orderings play an explicit r le. The work of Bird (for example [Bir84] is particularly noteworthy and our own remarks in [Hen87] are in this spirit too. The advice one obtains from these sources is that the calculus of transformations can be restricted, without prejudicing its expressibility, so that folding is only allowed on immediate predecessors in some well ordering. So far as we can tell from the available literature ....

Henson, M. C., Elements of functional languages, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987.

No context found.

Martin C. Henson. Elements of Functional Languages. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1987. 166

No context found.

Henson, M. C., Elements of Functional Languages, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, U. K., 1987.

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