K. Marriot and P. Stuckey, "The 3 R's of Optimizing Constraint Logic Programs: Refinment, Removal and Reordering", Proc. 20 th ACM-POPL, 1993, pp 334--344. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
A Generic Algorithm for CLP Analysis - Nevin Heintze School (1995) (Correct)
.... engine relies directly on a specialized representation using substitutions, which cannot be lifted to constraint logic programming (CLP) This is a pity since analysis for CLP is arguably more important than for LP the opportunities for compiler optimizations are considerably greater (see e.g. [11]) This paper presents an unfolding engine for CLP. The main technical difference from the previous engine is a novel use of input output variables in the constraints, as opposed to the manipulation of substitutions. What results is not just a more general engine, but a far simpler and more ....
....standard engine for CLP, whatever abstract and constraint domains are used. This in fact represents the main technical result of this paper. We next illustrate some differences between a standard abstract interpretation algorithm, and the old and new engines. Consider the abstract domain LSign [11, 12] which abstracts the coefficients in linear arithmetic expressions by their sign. Thus for example, 3X Gamma 4Y = 5 is described by the LSign formula PhiX Psi Y = Phi where Phi denotes some positive number, and Psi some negative number. p(X,Y) q(X) p(A,B) A 2 B = 3. q(A) A = ....
K. Marriot and P. Stuckey, "The 3 R's of Optimizing Constraint Logic Programs: Refinment, Removal and Reordering", Proc. 20 th ACM-POPL, 1993, pp 334--344.
A Generic Algorithm for CLP Analysis - Exte Nd Ed (Correct)
.... engine relies directly on a specialized representation using substitutions, which cannot be lifted to constraint logic programming (CLP) This is a pity since analysis for CLP is arguably more important than for LP the opportunities for compiler optimizations are considerably greater (see e.g. [11]) This paper presents an unfolding engine for CLP. The main technical difference from the previous engine is a novel use of input output variables in the constraints, as opposed to the manipulation of substitutions. What results is not just a more general engine, but a far simpler and more ....
....the standard engine for CLP, whatever abstract and constraint domains are used. This in fact represents the main technical result of this paper. We next illustrate some differences between a standard abstract interpretation algorithm, and the old and new engines. Consider the abstract domain LSign [11, 12] which abstracts the coefficients in linear arithmetic expressions by their sign. Thus for example, 3X Gamma 4Y = 5 is described by the LSign formula PhiX Psi Y = Phi where Phi denotes some positive number, and Psi some negative number. p(X,Y) q(X) p(A,B) A 2 B = 3. q(A) A = ....
K. Marriot and P. Stuckey, "The 3 R's of Optimizing Constraint Logic Programs: Refinment, Removal and Reordering", Proc. 20 th ACM-POPL, 1993, pp 334--344.
Bottom-up Evaluation of Datalog Programs with Arithmetic.. - Laurent Fribourg (1992) (1 citation) (Correct)
No context found.
K. Marriot and P.J. Stuckey. "The 3 R's of Optimizing Constraint Logic Programs: Refinement, Removal and Reordering". Proc. 20th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, Charleston, 1993, pp. 334-344.
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