Results 1 
6 of
6
Institutions: An abstract framework for formal specifications
 Algebraic Foundations of Systems Specifications
, 1999
"... ..."
From Total Equational to Partial First Order Logic
, 1998
"... The focus of this chapter is the incremental presentation of partial firstorder logic, seen as a powerful framework where the specification of most data types can be directly represented in the most natural way. Both model theory and logical deduction are described in full detail. Alternatives to pa ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The focus of this chapter is the incremental presentation of partial firstorder logic, seen as a powerful framework where the specification of most data types can be directly represented in the most natural way. Both model theory and logical deduction are described in full detail. Alternatives to partiality, like (variants of) error algebras and ordersortedness are also discussed, showing their uses and limitations. Moreover, both the total and the partial (positive) conditional fragment are investigated in detail, and in particular the existence of initial (free) models for such restricted logical paradigms is proved. Some more powerful algebraic frameworks are sketched at the end. Equational specifications introduced in last chapter, are a powerful tool to represent the most common data types used in programming languages and their semantics. Indeed, Bergstra and Tucker have shown in a series of papers (see [BT87] for a complete exposition of results) that a data type is semicompu...
About raising and handling exceptions
, 2006
"... Abstract. This paper presents a unified framework for dealing with a deduction system and a denotational semantics of exceptions. It is based on the fact that handling exceptions can be seen as a kind of generalized case distinction. This point of view on exceptions has been introduced in 2004, it i ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. This paper presents a unified framework for dealing with a deduction system and a denotational semantics of exceptions. It is based on the fact that handling exceptions can be seen as a kind of generalized case distinction. This point of view on exceptions has been introduced in 2004, it is based on the notion of diagrammatic logic, which assumes some familiarity with category theory. Extensive sums of types can be used for dealing with case distinctions. The aim of this new paper is to focus on the role of a generalized extensivity property for dealing with exceptions. Moreover, the presentation of this paper makes only a
2 Algebraic Preliminaries
"... The purpose of this chapter is to present the basic definitions and results on which the following chapters rely. Most of this material is quite standard and for that reason the presentation will be concise. More detailed presentations with greater emphasis on motivation, exercises, and examples may ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The purpose of this chapter is to present the basic definitions and results on which the following chapters rely. Most of this material is quite standard and for that reason the presentation will be concise. More detailed presentations with greater emphasis on motivation, exercises, and examples may be found in [EM85, Wir90,LEW96,ST]. The most basic assumption of work on algebraic specification is that a program is modeled as an algebra, that is, a set of data together with a number of functions over this set. The branch of mathematics which deals with algebras in a general sense (as opposed to the study of specific classes of algebras, such as groups and rings) is called universal algebra or sometimes general algebra. This chapter presents the basics of universal algebra, generalized to the manysorted case as required to model programs which manipulate several kinds or sorts of data. Some extensions useful for modeling more complex programs are sketched at the end of the chapter. 2.1 Manysorted sets When using an algebra to model a program which manipulates several sorts of data, it is natural to partition the underlying set of values in the algebra so that there is one set of values for each sort of data. It is often convenient to manipulate such a family of sets as a unit in such a way that operations on this unit respect the “typing ” of data values. Let S be a set (of sorts). An Ssorted set is an Sindexed family of sets X = 〈Xs〉s∈S,whichisempty if Xs is empty for all s ∈ S. The empty Ssorted set is written ∅. Let X = 〈Xs〉s∈S and Y = 〈Ys〉s∈S be Ssorted sets. Union, intersection, Cartesian product, disjoint union, inclusion (subset), and equality of X and Y are defined as follows:
Classifications In Algebraic Specifications Of Abstract Data Types
, 1996
"... DATA TYPES Simone Veglioni Programming Research Group University of Oxford Oxford, U.K. email: veglioni@comlab.ox.ac.uk PRGTR796 \Delta Oxford University Computing Laboratory Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QD Classifications in Algebraic Specifications of Abstract Data Types Simon ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
DATA TYPES Simone Veglioni Programming Research Group University of Oxford Oxford, U.K. email: veglioni@comlab.ox.ac.uk PRGTR796 \Delta Oxford University Computing Laboratory Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QD Classifications in Algebraic Specifications of Abstract Data Types Simone Veglioni Programming Research Group University of Oxford Oxford, U.K. email:veglioni@comlab.ox.ac.uk keywords: algebraic specification, sort, strong and weak overloading, manysorted and universal structures. Abstract In this paper we describe the role classifications play in algebraic approaches to specification of Abstract Data Types (ADTs) and show how they influence expressivity and mechanizability. In the last two decades many different logical systems for the algebraic specification of ADTs have been developed, each one pursuing its own principles and goals. Since a careful analysis of these logical systems, taking into account not only their expressivity, but also their mech...
Algebraic System Specification and Development: Survey and Annotated Bibliography  Second Edition 
, 1997
"... Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.5.4 Special Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.6 Semantics of Programming Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.1 Semantics of Ada . . . ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.5.4 Special Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.6 Semantics of Programming Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.1 Semantics of Ada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.2 Action Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.7 Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.1 Early Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.2 Recent Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.7.3 The Common Framework Initiative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5 Methodology 57 5.1 Development Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.1.1 Applica...