Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:11:16 -0700

Related articles |
---|

Research about better integrating sets with languages bennu.strelitzia@gmail.com (Bennu Strelitzia) (2009-12-04) |

Re: Research about better integrating sets with languages preston.briggs@gmail.com (preston.briggs@gmail.com) (2009-12-11) |

From: | Bennu Strelitzia <bennu.strelitzia@gmail.com> |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Date: | Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:11:16 -0700 |

Organization: | XMission http://xmission.com/ |

Keywords: | design, question |

Posted-Date: | 05 Dec 2009 23:26:22 EST |

Am interested in pointers to any of the following computer language

research or implementations:

* Set abstractions and operations including infinite, realizing the

impossibility of any complete implementation of such infinite sets, but

undaunted in the desire to still implement, for example, many natural

useful infinite sets, i.e. the set of integers, the set of X-collated

lists, etc.

* Use of set abstraction instead of more-rigid types/classes of most

languages, i.e. a function is declared or determined to accept odd

integers and return the octal string representations of integers 1..100.

This is to explore a concrete functional language implementation that is

more-easily susceptible to mathematical analysis, proof of safety, etc.

by declaring/capturing much more accurately even if inherently

incompletely, what can be determined about a function's domain,

codomain, range, etc. than traditional compiler type systems easily allow.

Bennu

[Well, there's always SETL. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.