Results 1 
2 of
2
CallbyName, CallbyValue, CallbyNeed, and the Linear Lambda Calculus
, 1994
"... Girard described two translations of intuitionistic logic into linear logic, one where A > B maps to (!A) o B, and another where it maps to !(A o B). We detail the action of these translations on terms, and show that the first corresponds to a callbyname calculus, while the second corresponds t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Girard described two translations of intuitionistic logic into linear logic, one where A > B maps to (!A) o B, and another where it maps to !(A o B). We detail the action of these translations on terms, and show that the first corresponds to a callbyname calculus, while the second corresponds to callbyvalue. We further show that if the target of the translation is taken to be an affine calculus, where ! controls contraction but weakening is allowed everywhere, then the second translation corresponds to a callbyneed calculus, as recently defined by Ariola, Felleisen, Maraist, Odersky, and Wadler. Thus the different calling mechanisms can be explained in terms of logical translations, bringing them into the scope of the CurryHoward isomorphism.
Separating Weakening and Contraction in a Linear Lambda Calculus
 in: Proc. CATS'98, Computing: the Fourth Australian Theory Symposium (Perth
, 1996
"... . We present a separatedlinear lambda calculus of resource consumption based on a refinement of linear logic which allows separate control of weakening and contraction. The calculus satisfies subject reduction and confluence, and inherits previous results on the relationship of Girard's two transla ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We present a separatedlinear lambda calculus of resource consumption based on a refinement of linear logic which allows separate control of weakening and contraction. The calculus satisfies subject reduction and confluence, and inherits previous results on the relationship of Girard's two translations from minimal intuitionistic logic to linear logic with callbyname and callbyvalue. We construct a hybrid translation from Girard's two which is sound and complete for mapping types and reduction sequences from callbyneed into separatedlinear . This treatment of callbyneed is more satisfying than in previous work, allowing a contrasting of all three reduction strategies in the manner (for example) that the CPS translations allow for callbyname and callbyvalue. H OW can we explain the differences between parameterpassing styles? With the continuationpassing style (CPS) transforms [24, 25], one makes the flow of control explicit. Each parameterpassing style is associated ...