Results 1 
8 of
8
Semantics of Local Variables
, 1992
"... This expository article discusses recent progress on the problem of giving sufficiently abstract semantics to localvariable declarations in Algollike languages, especially work using categorical methods. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 36 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This expository article discusses recent progress on the problem of giving sufficiently abstract semantics to localvariable declarations in Algollike languages, especially work using categorical methods.
Extending the Loop Language with HigherOrder Procedural Variables
 Special issue of ACM TOCL on Implicit Computational Complexity
, 2010
"... We extend Meyer and Ritchie’s Loop language with higherorder procedures and procedural variables and we show that the resulting programming language (called Loop ω) is a natural imperative counterpart of Gödel System T. The argument is twofold: 1. we define a translation of the Loop ω language int ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We extend Meyer and Ritchie’s Loop language with higherorder procedures and procedural variables and we show that the resulting programming language (called Loop ω) is a natural imperative counterpart of Gödel System T. The argument is twofold: 1. we define a translation of the Loop ω language into System T and we prove that this translation actually provides a lockstep simulation, 2. using a converse translation, we show that Loop ω is expressive enough to encode any term of System T. Moreover, we define the “iteration rank ” of a Loop ω program, which corresponds to the classical notion of “recursion rank ” in System T, and we show that both translations preserve ranks. Two applications of these results in the area of implicit complexity are described. 1
The Expressive Power of Structural Operational Semantics with Explicit Assumptions
 Proceedings of TYPES'93, LNCS number 806
"... . We explore the expressive power of the formalism called Natural Operational Semantics, NOS, introduced by Burstall and Honsell for defining the operational semantics of programming languages. This formalism is derived from the Natural Semantics of Despeyroux and Kahn. It arises if we take seriousl ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. We explore the expressive power of the formalism called Natural Operational Semantics, NOS, introduced by Burstall and Honsell for defining the operational semantics of programming languages. This formalism is derived from the Natural Semantics of Despeyroux and Kahn. It arises if we take seriously the possibility of deriving assertions in Natural Semantics under assumptions, i.e. using hypotheticogeneral premises in the sense of MartinLof. We investigate to what extent we can reduce to hypothetical premises the notions of store and environment of Plotkin's Structural Operational Semantics. We use this formalism to define the semantics of a functional language which features commands, blocks, procedures, complex declarations, structures and Abstract Data Types. We give the NOS together with the denotational semantics and prove the adequacy of the former w.r.t. the latter. We discuss some other di#culties which arose in the previous treatment of variables in connection with procedures. Natural Operational Semantics can be easily encoded in formal systems based on #calculus typechecking, such as the Edinburgh Logical Framework. We briefly investigate this and discuss some of the design choices. 1
Deriving a FloydHoare logic for nonlocal jumps from a formulæastypes notion of control
"... ..."
Première partie
"... 1 Interprétation calculatoire de la logique soustractive..................... 7 1.1 Présentation du premier article..................................... 7 1.2 À propos des systèmes avec relations de dépendance...................... 13 1.3 Logique à domaine constant et arithmétique................... ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
1 Interprétation calculatoire de la logique soustractive..................... 7 1.1 Présentation du premier article..................................... 7 1.2 À propos des systèmes avec relations de dépendance...................... 13 1.3 Logique à domaine constant et arithmétique............................ 14
for HigherOrder Procedural Variables
, 2009
"... We formally specified the type system and operational semantics of Loop ω with Ott and Isabelle/HOL proof assistant. Moreover, both the type system and the semantics of Loop ω have been tested using Isabelle/HOL program extraction facility for inductively defined relations. In particular, the progra ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We formally specified the type system and operational semantics of Loop ω with Ott and Isabelle/HOL proof assistant. Moreover, both the type system and the semantics of Loop ω have been tested using Isabelle/HOL program extraction facility for inductively defined relations. In particular, the program that computes the Ackermann function type checks and behaves as expected. The main difference (apart from the choice of an Adalike concrete syntax) with Loop ω comes from the treatment of parameter passing. Indeed, since Ott does not currently fully support αconversion, we rephrased the operational semantics with explicit aliasing in order to implement the out parameter passing mode.
Deriving a FloydHoare logic for nonlocal jumps
"... from a formulæastypes notion of control ..."
(Show Context)