H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language--independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... We believe that the correctness of our deforestation method can be proved by using Pitts syntactic formulation of logical relation [14] Since our transformation is driven by type information, the proof would be more comprehensive than that for the original attribute grammar composition method [6]. Finally to note, it would be very interesting to investigate the relationship between the macro tree transducer composition method and ours more closely. The example given in the previous section indicates that their composition abilities are very close, but it is an open question if they ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and languageindependency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3(3):223-- 278, 1983.

....an informal comparison between classical deforestation and cheap deforestation is performed. On the other hand we would like to inspect composition methods for attributed tree transducers [6] which are abstractions of attribute grammars [14] Such composition results were presented e.g. in [6, 8, 9]. They can also be used for the composition of a restricted class of mtts [15] For the intended comparison, we consider macro attributed tree transducers [16] as suitable integration formalism. Acknowledgment I would like to thank Morten Heine S rensen and Heiko Vogler for stimulating ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language{independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223-278, 1983.

....of attribute grammars have been proposed [4, 13, 14, 16] which allow transformations not possible by ordinary deforestation. The problem of accumulator composition studied in this paper is a restricted instance of the more powerful composition of attribute grammars (or also tree transducers [6] [5, 7, 8]. While our class is very limited compared to the general method, it can successfully compose programs with an accumulating parameter, and importantly, simply. It also highlights some key features of attribute compositions, in the functional world. This in turn may help us to bridge the gap ....

....as special functional programs. In fact, restricted functional programs can be translated into attribute grammars and vice versa. Moreover, since there are also composition techniques for attribute grammars, we can use these techniques to eliminate intermediate results of functional programs. In [5, 7, 8] powerful methods for composing attribute grammars are presented. Indeed, function dmap represents a class of attributed tree transducers [6] restricted to one inherited and one synthesized attribute, and lists as data structure. The computation of both attributes is regular in the sense that ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Sci. Comput. Prog., 3: 223--278, 1983.

....and wrappers. It successfully transforms p non into p acc , but is also less general in the above mentioned three aspects with respect to the transformation of non accumulative into accumulative programs. In [17, 18] it was demonstrated that sometimes composition and decomposition techniques [8, 11, 6, 12] for attribute grammars [16] and tree transducers [10] can help, when deforestation fails. For this purpose we have considered special functional programs as compositions of macro tree transducers (for short mtts) 5, 4, 6] Every function f of an mtt is defined by a case analysis on the root ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language--independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

....of attribute grammars have been proposed [4, 12, 13, 15] which allow transformations not possible by ordinary deforestation. The problem of accumulator composition studied in this note is a restricted instance of the more powerful composition of attribute grammars (or also tree transducers [6] [5, 7, 8]. While our class is very limited compared to the general method, it can successfully compose programs with an accumulating parameter, and importantly, simply. It also highlights some key features of attribute compositions, in the functional world. This may help to bridge the gap between the ....

....computes information owing upwards as the list is traversed. In terms of attribute grammars, we can speak of inherited and synthesized attributes, respectively. Such a relation between functional programming languages and attribute grammars has been pointed out, 11] for the notable example. In [5, 7, 8] powerful methods for composing attribute grammars are presented. Indeed, function dmap represents a class of attributed tree transducers [6] restricted to the use of one inherited and one synthesized attribute, and lists as data structure. The computation of both attributes is regular in the ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Sci. Comput. Prog., 3:223-278, 1983.

....app app (A x1) y1 y2 = A (app app x1 y1 y2) 6 3. 7 ATToATT This module implements the function compAttAtt which composes two attributed tree transducers by following the construction described in [K uh98] based on composition results for language morphisms and attribute coupled grammars, cf. [Gan83, GG84, Gie88]) This construction does not work with arbitrary attributed tree transducers. It is restricted to the cases where either the rst attributed tree transducer has the single use property or the second one is a top down tree transducer. Due to the fact that a top down tree transducer may be speci ed ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language{independency in automatically generated compilers. Sci. of Comput. Prog., 3:223-278, 1983.

....computation: the values of all attributes are trees, with substitution as the only operation on trees, and the output tree is the value of a designated attribute at the root of the input tree. Moreover, the second attribute grammar satis es the so called single use restriction (investigated in [Gan,GanGie,Gie]) which means that each attribute is used at most once. An att R can also be viewed as one attribute grammar of which the attributes can be evaluated in two phases: in the rst phase only attributes with nitely many values are evaluated, called ags in [Eng2,Blo] and in the second phase the ....

....noncircular, and G is noncircular if it is noncircular on every tree t 2 T . An attribute grammar G is single use restricted (sur) on a tree t 2 T if no node of D(t) has more than one outgoing edge, and G is sur if it is sur on every tree t 2 T . The single use restriction was investigated in [Gan,GanGie,Gie]; it received its name in [Gie] We now de ne how to give the correct values to the attributes of the tree t. Let dec be a function from A(t) to [ such that dec(h ; ui) 2 W ( for every h ; ui 2 A(t) The function dec is a decoration of t if all instructions are satis ed, i.e. for every ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ganzinger; Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers, Sci. Comput. Programming 3 (1983), 223-278

....into programs that do not (cf. Wad90] Tree transducers and (macro) attribute grammars can be seen as special functional programs and extensions of functional programs, respectively. Thus, also composition results for tree transducers (e.g. EV85, KV94b, Kuh97a] and attribute grammars (e.g. [Gan83, Gie88, Kuh97a]) can be used to remove intermediate data structures. In [Kuh98] we describe a technique which uses composition results for attribute grammars in order to optimize functional programs. In this project, we want to compare deforestation like techniques and composition results for tree transducers, ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language--independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

....into programs that do not (cf. Wad90] Tree transducers and (macro) attribute grammars can be seen as special functional programs and extensions of functional programs, respectively. Thus, also composition results for tree transducers (e.g. EV85, KV94b, Kuh97a] and attribute grammars (e.g. [Gan83, Gie88, Kuh97a]) can be used to remove intermediate data structures. In [Kuh98] we describe a technique which uses composition results for attribute grammars in order to optimize functional programs. In this project, we want to compare deforestation like techniques and composition results for tree transducers, ....

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language--independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

.... by attributed tree transducers (ATTs) with look ahead which are single use restricted (sur) ATTs are a variation of attribute grammars in which all attribute values are trees (see [Ful81, FV98] and the sur property is a well known restriction on the rules of an attribute grammar (introduced in [Gan83]) each attribute is used at most once. Like for attribute grammars, the class of translations realized by sur ATTs is closed under composition, which does not hold for unrestricted ATTs (see also [Kuh97] This closure property remains when look ahead is added. The look ahead of an ATT can be ....

....and thus the out degree of every node is either zero or one. This can be ensured by allowing each outside attribute of an input symbol oe to be used at most once in the rules in R oe . An ATT A with the latter property is called single use restricted. This property was introduced by Ganzinger [Gan83] as the syntactic single used restriction . An interesting property of such ATTs is that the class of translations which can be realized by them is closed under composition [Gan83, Gie88, Kuh97] whereas this is not the case for the class ATT (cf. Corollary 4.1 of [Ful81] Definition 5.1 ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

....tree transducers the construction is more involved, because the attributed tree transducer A performs a tree walk over the input tree, i.e. over the output tree of a top down finite tree automaton M which has the recognizable tree language L as domain and output. Ganzinger and Giegerich [Gan83, Gie88] proposed a technique for the composition of attribute couplings which are devices similar to attributed tree transducers. It works in such a way that the right hand sides of the rules of the first attributed tree transducer are translated by the second attributed tree transducer. However to apply ....

....at most one rule of the first form. This type of tree transducer will be called semi relabeling, for short s relabeling. If an s relabeling M is seen as an attribute grammar G, where the states of M are the synthesized attributes of G, then G satisfies the ssur property of Ganzinger and Giegerich [Gan83, Gie88]. This fact will be important in Section 5. Definition 4.4 (semi relabeling) Let M = Q; Sigma; Delta; q 0 ; R) be a total deterministic top down tree transducer. If for every oe 2 Sigma (k) with k 1, either rhs(q; oe) 2 T Delta for every q 2 Q, or there is a (unique) q 2 Q such that ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

....computation: the values of all attributes are trees, with substitution as the only operation on trees, and the output tree is the value of a designated attribute at the root of the input tree. Moreover, the second attribute grammar satisfies the so called single use restriction (investigated in [Gan, GanGie, Gie]) which means that each attribute is used at most once. An att R can also be viewed as one attribute grammar of which the attributes can be evaluated in two phases: in the first phase only attributes with finitely many values are evaluated, called flags in [Eng2, Blo] and in the second phase ....

....G is noncircular if it is noncircular on every tree t 2 T Sigma . An attribute grammar G is single use restricted (sur) on a tree t 2 T Sigma if no node of D(t) has more than one outgoing edge, and G is sur if it is sur on every tree t 2 T Sigma . The single use restriction was investigated in [Gan, GanGie, Gie]; it received its name in [Gie] We now define how to give the correct values to the attributes of the tree t. Let dec be a function from A(t) to [ Omega , such that dec(hff; ui) 2 W (ff) for every hff; ui 2 A(t) The function dec is a decoration of t if all instructions are satisfied, i.e. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ganzinger; Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers, Sci. Comput. Programming 3 (1983), 223--278

No context found.

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language--independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

No context found.

Harald Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3(3):223--278, 1983.

No context found.

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language{independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223-278, 1983.

No context found.

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language-independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223--278, 1983.

No context found.

H. Ganzinger. Increasing modularity and language{independency in automatically generated compilers. Science of Computer Programming, 3:223-278, 1983.

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