### Table 1: Polymorphic Type Assignment

1993

"... In PAGE 7: ... We shall work with a syntax-directed formulation of the Damas-Milner polymorphic type assignment system inspired by the static semantics of Standard ML [25]. The rules given in Table1 de ne a formal system for deriving judgements of the form ; ` e : , expressing that the expression e may be assigned the monotype in context ;. The rules are parametric in a signature , whichweleave implicit.... In PAGE 7: ... The rules are parametric in a signature , whichweleave implicit. We often write ; ` e : ,orjuste : when ; is empty, to mean that this typing judgement is derivable in accordance with the rules of Table1 . An expression e is said to be well-typed in a context ; i there exists a suchthat ; ` e : .... In PAGE 7: ... An expression e is said to be well-typed in a context ; i there exists a suchthat ; ` e : . Some of the rules given in Table1 make use of auxiliary notions that merit further explanation. Rule var makes use of the polymorphic instance relation whichisde nedtoholdi is a polytype of the form 8t 1 : .... In PAGE 7: ...We sometimes abbreviate Close ; ( ) to just Close( ) when ; is the empty context. The formal system of Table1 is clearly a subsystem of the system given by Damas and Milner [4] in the sense that if ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table 1, then it is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system. Conversely,if;` e : is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system, then ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table 1 whenever .... In PAGE 7: ...We sometimes abbreviate Close ; ( ) to just Close( ) when ; is the empty context. The formal system of Table 1 is clearly a subsystem of the system given by Damas and Milner [4] in the sense that if ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table1 , then it is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system. Conversely,if;` e : is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system, then ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table 1 whenever .... In PAGE 7: ... The formal system of Table 1 is clearly a subsystem of the system given by Damas and Milner [4] in the sense that if ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table 1, then it is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system. Conversely,if;` e : is derivable in Damas and Milner apos;s system, then ; ` e : is derivable in the system of Table1 whenever .Thus all and only the monotypes derivable for a given term in Damas and Milner apos;s system are derivable in the system considered here.... ..."

### Table 1: Polymorphic Type Assignment

1994

"... In PAGE 3: ... Polymorphic type assignment is de ned by a set of rules for deriving judgements of the form ; ` e : , with the intended meaning that the expression e has type under the assumption that the locations in e have the monotypes ascribed by , and the free variables in e have the polytypes ascribed by . The rules of inference are given in Table1 . These rules make use of two auxiliary notions.... ..."

Cited by 59

### Table 1: Polymorphic Type Assignment

1994

"... In PAGE 2: ... Polymorphic type assignment is de ned by a set of rules for deriving judgements of the form ;; ` e : , with the intended meaning that the expression e has type under the assumption that the locations in e have the monotypes ascribed by , and the free variables in e have the polytypes ascribed by . The rules of inference are given in Table1 . These rules make use of two auxiliary notions.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1.8: Polymorphic extension of a type system. to de ne a retraction-embedding pair from to the type ( !o)!o, one would require that each type is a retract of the type of answers o. It is also possible to give a proper typing for the functions EK and RK using recursive types, but we prefer the polymorphic solution. note that we don apos;t really use the full power of polymorphism, since the only polymorphic types occur in the form 8s:( !s)!s, where s is not free in . To restrict the codomain of the CPS transform to a call-by-value language, we also de ne the calculus cp8, to be an extension of cp with polymorphic types. In addition to polymorphic extension, we will also consider an extension of the type system of a calculus with products. This extension is discussed in Section 1.9.2. 1.3 Source to Source Transforms A source-to-source transform is simply a function mapping terms of one calculus to terms of another calculus. Since we work in typed lambda calculi, instead of mapping terms to terms, we study transforms that map typing sequents of one calculus to typing sequents of

1997

Cited by 4

### Table 3: Type Rules for Linear Polymorphic Calculus

2000

Cited by 51

### Table 3: Polymorphic checking with type substitution

Cited by 2

### Table 1 Variation at polymorphic segments

2007

"... In PAGE 6: ... For instance, between the 105 var2CSA sequences and P. reichenowi, 70% of the polymorphic segments (4370/6216) exactly match one of the consensus types and an additional 22% differ by only one amino acid from consensus ( Table1 ). Fur- thermore, many of these basic types are present both across Fig.... ..."

### Table 2: Faults due to inheritance and polymorphism

2002

"... In PAGE 4: ....3. Injected faults Each subject program P was seeded by injecting faults into the bodies of the antecedent and consequent methods for each member of each type family induced by the declared type of the coupling sequences in P. The types of faults injected into each unit under test are described in detail in our previous work [13], and summarized in Table2 . The number of faults was determined by the syntactic characteristics of a particular subject program and the syntactic properties necessary for the manifestation of a failure for a given fault type.... ..."

Cited by 3

### Table 2: Faults due to inheritance and polymorphism

2002

"... In PAGE 4: ....3. Injected faults Each subject program P was seeded by injecting faults into the bodies of the antecedent and consequent methods for each member of each type family induced by the declared type of the coupling sequences in P. The types of faults injected into each unit under test are described in detail in our previous work [13], and summarized in Table2 . The number of faults was determined by the syntactic characteristics of a particular subject program and the syntactic properties necessary for the manifestation of a failure for a given fault type.... ..."

Cited by 3