| R. Bird and O. de Moor. The Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996. |
....as follows. We defined a simple but powerful algebraic construction of digraphs called SP Terms, on which program analyses can be naturally described as catamorphisms (or mutumorphism) As catamorphism enjoys many nice algebraic rules such as fusion and tupling for algorithmic optimization [6], this catamorphic formalization of program analyses makes it possible to systematically derive efficient analysis algorithms, which has not been really recognized so far. We identified that many program analyses can be considered as the maximum marking problems. By making use of the ....
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1996.
....to programs has already been advocated for other purposes. They can serve to document the intended behavior of the program, independently of the implementation, and have been used to explore eiicient algorithms and as a design methodology that reduces the inci dence of programming error [4]. Another advantage may be reaped in testing and debugging of programs, where they can play the role of a test oracle [8] Perhaps the additional incentive of efficiency gains in compilation will help convince the world that equational specification is a worthwhile part of the programming ....
....rule states that when foldr consumes the result of a call to build, one can eliminate the intermediate list by applying g directly to k and z. To give an example of applying this rule we must write list consuming and producing functions using foldr and build respectively. For example: sum [5,4,3,2,1]) 15 sum : lint] Int sum xs = foldr ( 0 xs (down 5) 5,4,3,2,1] down : Int lint] down v = build (c n down vcn) down 0 cons nil = nil down v cons nil = cons v (down (v l) cons nil) Again, the definition of sum in terms of foldr is conventional. The function down ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Bird, R. and O. D. Moor, "The Algebra of Programming," Prentice Hall, 1996.
....schema transformation. Our work is inspired by Murata s. However, we do not use tree automata, nor attribute grammars. Rather, we formulate DTD aware XML document transformations in a more abstract setting, often borrowing notations and results from category theory [16] Our approach is algebraic [8], and can be viewed as extending the Bird Meertens formalism [7, 17] to functions that map between two sets of mutually recursive data types. In this paper, we freely use the notations of Meijer, Fokkinga, and Paterson when writing fold unfold functions [18] We have prototyped the theory ....
....Q( f Fact 6.1. f, g] f Q[ f, g] g. See [18] The following diagram illustrates the situation where a fold function can be fused with another function to become yet another fold function. PGt w k f # Pw Pk Fact 6.2. k = f # if k f = f # Pk. See [8]. We now give a su#cient condition to fuse two XML document transformations into one. Proposition 6.3. Let ( f : s Gt and ( h ) t Hu be two fold functions derived by, respectively, the two inductive functions f : PGt Gt and h : QHu Hu. Then, Gh if f = G up t ....
Richard Bird and Oege de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
....of a program. 1 : read X; 2 : while X 1 do 3 1; 4 : C : X 2; 5 : if C = 0 then 6 : X : X 2; else 7 : X : Z; fi; 2; od; 9 : write X; CFG SP term 4 7 8 9 [1, 9] 1, 2] e [9, 2] 2 [9, 3] 3, 4] 4, 5] e [2, 8] P [5, 8] 5, 6] 8, 6] [5, 7] [8, 7] Fig. 4. An example of control flow graph and its transformation to SP Term 3.2 Checking on SP Terms Now we show how the idea in Section 2 can be brought here for analyzing on SP Terms by checking on marked SP Term (a SP Term with some labels being marked) We use the same example of ....
.... 1 : read X; 2 : while X 1 do 3 1; 4 : C : X 2; 5 : if C = 0 then 6 : X : X 2; else 7 : X : Z; fi; 2; od; 9 : write X; CFG SP term 4 7 8 9 [1, 9] 1, 2] e [9, 2] 2 [9, 3] 3, 4] 4, 5] e [2, 8] P [5, 8] 5, 6] 8, 6] 5, 7] [8, 7] Fig. 4. An example of control flow graph and its transformation to SP Term 3.2 Checking on SP Terms Now we show how the idea in Section 2 can be brought here for analyzing on SP Terms by checking on marked SP Term (a SP Term with some labels being marked) We use the same example of dead code ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
R.S. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebras of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1996.
....on the particular input, due to sparsity of elements in the linked lists. Our method exploits only control and data structures in the given program; we do not yet know how to systematically discover stronger invariants such as orderings found in algorithms that use greedy or thinning strategies [6]. 4. INDEXED VS. RECURSIVE DATA STRUCTURES An alternative to indexed data structures for maintaining computed values is recursive data structures. Our same method of incrementalization for optimization is suciently general for exploiting also recursive data structures. This section describes a ....
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. The Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
Richard Bird and Oege de Moor. The Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
R. Bird, O. de Moor, The Algebra of Programming, Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
Bird, R., de Moor, O.: Algebra of Programming, Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1997.
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
Bird, R., de Moor, O.: Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall (1997)
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1996.
No context found.
Richard Bird and Oege de Moor. The Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
Richard Bird and Oege de Moor. The Algebra of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1996.
No context found.
Richard Bird and Oege de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
Bird, R. S. and de Moor, O. (1997)Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall.
No context found.
Bird, R., de Moor, O.: Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall (1997)
No context found.
R. S. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
R. Bird and Oege de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
Bird, R., de Moor, O.: Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall (1997)
No context found.
R. Bird and Oege de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. Prentice Hall, 1997.
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor, Algebra of programming (Prentice Hall, London, 1997).
No context found.
R. Bird and O. de Moor. Algebra of Programming. PrenticeHall, 1997.
First 50 documents Next 50
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST at NUS Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST at NUS - Copyright Penn State and NEC. Hosted by the School of Computing, National University of Singapore.