Strictness analysis using abstract reduction

Nöcker, Eric

doi:10.1145/165180.165219

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Abstract reduction sequences may not terminate. A special technique called reduction path analysis is used to cut off these sequences in a way that keeps most of the strictness information intact; see [Nöc93], [CHH00]. The main disadvantage of this approach is the lack of modularity; it requires the implementations of the involved functions to perform the analyses effectively.…”

Section: Discussion Of Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Derivation and inference of higher-order strictness types

Smetsers

Eekelen

2015

Computer Languages, Systems & Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We extend an existing first-order typing system for strictness analysis to the fully higher-order case, covering both the derivation system and the inference algorithm. The resulting strictness typing system has expressive capabilities far beyond that of traditional strictness analysis systems. This extension is developed with the explicit aim of formally proving soundness of higher-order strictness typing with respect to a natural operational semantics. A key aspect of our approach is the introduction of a proof assistant at an early stage, namely during development of the proof. As such, the theorem prover aids the design of the language theoretic concepts. The new results in combination with their formal proof can be seen as a case study towards the achievement of the long term PoplMark Challenge. The proof framework developed for this case study can furthermore be used in other typing system case studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Of Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Derivation and inference of higher-order strictness types

Smetsers

Eekelen

2015

Computer Languages, Systems & Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A notable exception is the article by Schmidt-Schauß et al [33], who consider the semantics of seq in a safety proof for the strictness analysis of Nöcker [29], which is based on abstract reduction and implemented in the Clean compiler. As far as we are aware, we are the first to consider the problem of extending a relevance-based strictness analysis to deal with both lazy and eager application.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making “stricterness” more relevant

Holdermans

Hage

2010

Higher-Order Symb Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adapting a strictness analyser to have it take into account explicit strictness annotations can be a tricky business. Straightforward extensions of analyses based on relevance typing are likely to either be unsafe or fail to pick the fruits of increases in strictness that are introduced through annotations. We propose a more involved adaptation of relevance typing, that can be used to derive strictness analyses that are both safe and effective in the presence of explicit strictness annotations. The resulting type system provides a firm foundation for implementations of type-based strictness analysers in compilers for lazy programming languages such as Haskell and Clean.

show abstract

“…For example, the following set constants that are analogous to constants in [25,38] can be defined as:…”

Section: Consequences For Extended Lambda Calculimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The strictness analyses [25,32,34,35] employ abstract reduction. This is a method to extend expressions by set constants and to evaluate them in all possible ways, where also loop detection rules are applied.…”

Section: Consequences For Extended Lambda Calculimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a proposal for static analyses including structured data based on 4 predefined sets [38]. In [23][24][25], strictness analysis used a language for abstract sets extending the 4 fixed sets, where the language of sets enforces ⊥ ⊆ A ⊆ for all definable sets A. However, only the inclusions that syntactically follow from ⊥ ⊆ A ⊆ for all A, like (Cons ⊥ u) ⊆ (Cons u ) are used, but no attempt is made to exploit other valid inclusions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Deciding inclusion of set constants over infinite non-strict data structures

Schmidt-Schauß

Sabel

Schütz

2007

RAIRO-Theor. Inf. Appl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Various static analyses of functional programming languages that permit infinite data structures make use of set constants like Top, Inf, and Bot, denoting all terms, all lists not eventually ending in Nil, and all non-terminating programs, respectively. We use a set language that permits union, constructors and recursive definition of set constants with a greatest fixpoint semantics in the set of all, also infinite, computable trees, where all term constructors are non-strict. This paper proves decidability, in particular DEXPTIME-completeness, of inclusion of co-inductively defined sets by using algorithms and results from tree automata and set constraints. The test for set inclusion is required by certain strictness analysis algorithms in lazy functional programming languages and could also be the basis for further set-based analyses.

show abstract

Strictness analysis using abstract reduction

Cited by 22 publications

References 8 publications

Derivation and inference of higher-order strictness types

Derivation and inference of higher-order strictness types

Making “stricterness” more relevant

Deciding inclusion of set constants over infinite non-strict data structures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About