Results 1 
2 of
2
Program extraction from normalization proofs
 Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, number 664 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 1993
"... This paper describes formalizations of Tait’s normalization proof for the simply typed λcalculus in the proof assistants Minlog, Coq and Isabelle/HOL. From the formal proofs programs are machineextracted that implement variants of the wellknown normalizationbyevaluation algorithm. The case stud ..."
Abstract

Cited by 60 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper describes formalizations of Tait’s normalization proof for the simply typed λcalculus in the proof assistants Minlog, Coq and Isabelle/HOL. From the formal proofs programs are machineextracted that implement variants of the wellknown normalizationbyevaluation algorithm. The case study is used to test and compare the program extraction machineries of the three proof assistants in a nontrivial setting. 1
Phase distinctions in the compilation of Epigram
, 2005
"... Abstract. It is commonly believed that in dependently typed programming languages, the blurring of the distinction between types and values means that no type erasure is possible at runtime. In this paper, however, we propose an alternative phase distinction. Rather than distinguishing types and va ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. It is commonly believed that in dependently typed programming languages, the blurring of the distinction between types and values means that no type erasure is possible at runtime. In this paper, however, we propose an alternative phase distinction. Rather than distinguishing types and values in the compilation of EPIGRAM, we distinguish compiletime and runtime evaluation, and show by a series of program transformations that values which are not required at runtime can be erased. 1