### Table 1: Standard call-by-need reduction rules in dag-based form.

1995

"... In PAGE 7: ... In terms of our graphical lan- guage, we must eliminate the names z; w, the internal box, and pull the -node out of the shaded area, exactly the task of the lets-A, lets-V, and lets-C rules. Their dag-based representation in Table1 reveals that lets-V pulls a value out of the shaded area, eliminating a name on an edge; lets-C moves a wall; and lets-A moves a wall that is in the shaded area. The sequence lets-V, lets-A, lets-V su ces to expose the redex in our example: let z = (let w = x:x in w) in zz 7??????! lets-V let z = (let w = x:x in x:x) in zz 7??????! lets-A let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in zz) 7??????! lets-V let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in ( x:x)z) : Figure 4 (without unreachable dags) illustrates these steps.... In PAGE 7: ... The sequence lets-V, lets-A, lets-V su ces to expose the redex in our example: let z = (let w = x:x in w) in zz 7??????! lets-V let z = (let w = x:x in x:x) in zz 7??????! lets-A let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in zz) 7??????! lets-V let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in ( x:x)z) : Figure 4 (without unreachable dags) illustrates these steps.From Table1 it is clear that lets-C and lets-A do not change the dag associated with a term, while lets-V causes a duplication. Lemma 5.... ..."

Cited by 157

### Table 1: Standard call-by-need reduction rules in dag-based form.

1995

"... In PAGE 7: ... In terms of our graphical lan- guage, we must eliminate the names z; w, the internal box, and pull the -node out of the shaded area, exactly the task of the lets-A, lets-V, and lets-C rules. Their dag-based representation in Table1 reveals that lets-V pulls a value out of the shaded area, eliminating a name on an edge; lets-C moves a wall; and lets-A moves a wall that is in the shaded area. The sequence lets-V, lets-A, lets-V su ces to expose the redex in our example: let z = (let w = x:x in w) in zz 7??????! lets-V let z = (let w = x:x in x:x) in zz 7??????! lets-A let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in zz) 7??????! lets-V let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in ( x:x)z) : Figure 4 (without unreachable dags) illustrates these steps.... In PAGE 7: ... The sequence lets-V, lets-A, lets-V su ces to expose the redex in our example: let z = (let w = x:x in w) in zz 7??????! lets-V let z = (let w = x:x in x:x) in zz 7??????! lets-A let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in zz) 7??????! lets-V let w = x:x in (let z = x:x in ( x:x)z) : Figure 4 (without unreachable dags) illustrates these steps.From Table1 it is clear that lets-C and lets-A do not change the dag associated with a term, while lets-V causes a duplication. Lemma 5.... ..."

Cited by 157

### Table 4 shows the call-by-name CPS transform of [Plo75] (in fact, a recti ed variant of it, see the notes in Section 14). Here is how a reduction ( x. M)N ?!N MfN=xg is simulated in the transform. (As in call-by-value, we choose to take call-by- name for the reduction relation on the images of the CPS, but these terms are evaluation-order independent: see Theorem 6.1.) CN[[( x. M)N]]k

1999

"... In PAGE 25: ... M] def= x. [[M]] Table4 : The call-by-name CPS transform 6 The interpretation of call-by-name In this section we develop a -calculus encoding of call-by-name -calculus. The approach is similar to that for call-by-value in Section 5.... In PAGE 44: ...5. The encoding of N into -calculus will be that of Table4 , but without i/o types. We can assume that the encoding is into the plain polyadic -calculus, without i/o types, because Lemma 6.... In PAGE 67: ... The call-by-value CPS transform of Table 2 is due to Fischer [Fis72] (of which a more complete version is [Fis93]). The call-by-name CPS transform of Table4 is that of Plotkin [Plo75], based on work by Reynolds (such as [Rey72]); however, we have adopted the recti cation in the clause for variables due to Hatcli and Danvy [HD97] (Plotkin apos;s translation for variables was CN[[x]] def= x; the recti cation is necessary for the left-to-right implication of Theorem 6.4 to... In PAGE 68: ...ounterexample (14) to the converse of Theorem 5.5. The terms M and N used in the proof of Theorem 12.15 (non-completeness of the call-by-name encoding) are the same used by Plotkin [Plo75] to prove the non-completeness of the call- by-name CPS transform ( Table4 ) as a transformation of N into V . A CPS transform for call-by-need is studied by Okasaki, Lee and Tarditi [OLT94], using a -calculus extended with mutable references as target language.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 3 Primary language instruction 1998 and 1999 for districts in three categories of commitment to primary language programs prior to Proposition 227

2000

Cited by 2

### Table 1. Examples of domain specific languages. Language Domain of language use

"... In PAGE 2: ...To demonstrate that the idea of domain specific languages is not new, remind any specialized language as SQL, CAD, HTML, etc. Table1 shows several examples of DSL. Table 1.... ..."

### Table 1: The 24 IE languages analyzed. Language Abbreviation Language Abbreviation

2005

Cited by 1