Call Arity

Breitner, Joachim

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14675-1_3

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Having an implementation of the present work in Isabelle does not only give us great assurance about the correctness of our work, but additionally is a tool to formalize further work. We have used these semantics to prove that the compiler analysis and transformation "Call Arity" (Breitner, 2015a), which is implemented in the Haskell compiler GHC, is semantics-preserving and does not degrade performance (Breitner, 2015b(Breitner, , 2015c. We measure performance on a sufficiently abstract level by counting allocations on the heap, for which Launchbury's semantics provides just the right level of detail.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The adequacy of Launchbury's natural semantics for lazy evaluation

Breitner¹

2018

J. Funct. Prog.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In his seminal paper “A Natural Semantics for Lazy Evaluation”, John Launchbury proves his semantics correct with respect to a denotational semantics, and outlines a proof of adequacy. Previous attempts to rigorize the adequacy proof, which involves an intermediate natural semantics and an intermediate resourced denotational semantics, have failed. We devised a new, direct proof that skips the intermediate natural semantics. It is the first rigorous adequacy proof of Launchbury's semantics. We have modeled our semantics in the interactive theorem prover Isabelle and machine-checked our proofs. This does not only provide a maximum level of rigor, but also serves as a tool for further work, such as a machine-checked correctness proof of a compiler transformation.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The adequacy of Launchbury's natural semantics for lazy evaluation

Breitner¹

2018

J. Funct. Prog.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, for our purposes, all tail calls must also be exact-each must provide exactly as many arguments as there are outer lambdas in the function definition. This restriction can be lifted so long as the calls are consistent in the number of arguments passed, also known as the call arity [7]. However, it is unclear that this is useful often enough to warrant the additional complexity.…”

Section: Caveatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequent calculus as a compiler intermediate language

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The λ-calculus is popular as an intermediate language for practical compilers. But in the world of logic it has a lesser-known twin, born at the same time, called the sequent calculus. Perhaps that would make for a good intermediate language, too? To explore this question we designed Sequent Core, a practically-oriented core calculus based on the sequent calculus, and used it to re-implement a substantial chunk of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler.

show abstract

A Proof Strategy Language and Proof Script Generation for Isabelle/HOL

Nagashima

Kumar

2017

Automated Deduction – CADE 26

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We introduce a language, PSL, designed to capture high level proof strategies in Isabelle/HOL. Given a strategy and a proof obligation, PSL's runtime system generates and combines various tactics to explore a large search space with low memory usage. Upon success, PSL generates an efficient proof script, which bypasses a large part of the proof search. We also present PSL's monadic interpreter to show that the underlying idea of PSL is transferable to other ITPs.

show abstract

Call Arity

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

The adequacy of Launchbury's natural semantics for lazy evaluation

The adequacy of Launchbury's natural semantics for lazy evaluation

Sequent calculus as a compiler intermediate language

A Proof Strategy Language and Proof Script Generation for Isabelle/HOL

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About