Component-based semantics

Mosses, Peter

doi:10.1145/1596486.1596489

Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 1141 views

Component-based semantics

Peter Mosses

Pages: 3 - 10

Swansea University Author: Peter Mosses

Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.

DOI (Published version): 10.1145/1596486.1596489

Abstract

<p>Formal semantic descriptions have many potential pragmatic advantages over informal descriptions. Unfortunately, however, the major frameworks for formal semantics do not support component-based description of programming languages. Different languages often have many constructs in common,...

Full description

Published:	ACM 2009
URI:	https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa41
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

first_indexed	2013-07-23T11:49:18Z
last_indexed	2018-02-09T04:27:16Z
id	cronfa41
recordtype	SURis
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2013-10-17T15:28:14.4680979</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>41</id><entry>2012-02-23</entry><title>Component-based semantics</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>3f13b8ec315845c81d371f41e772399c</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-5826-7520</ORCID><firstname>Peter</firstname><surname>Mosses</surname><name>Peter Mosses</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2012-02-23</date><deptcode>FGSEN</deptcode><abstract><p>Formal semantic descriptions have many potential pragmatic advantages over informal descriptions. Unfortunately, however, the major frameworks for formal semantics do not support component-based description of programming languages. Different languages often have many constructs in common, but the corresponding parts of their semantic descriptions are not generally reusable. The lack of reusable components is one of the reasons why it has been an immense effort to give a semantic description of any larger language.</p><p>Here, we consider two semantic frameworks that do support component-based language description: action semantics, and a modular variant of structural operational semantics (MSOS). We analyse how the semantics of individual constructs can be described independently in these frameworks, explaining the key insights. We also speculate on the possible applicability of similar techniques in component-based software development.</p></abstract><type>Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract</type><journal></journal><volume></volume><journalNumber></journalNumber><paginationStart>3</paginationStart><paginationEnd>10</paginationEnd><publisher>ACM</publisher><placeOfPublication/><issnPrint/><issnElectronic/><keywords/><publishedDay>25</publishedDay><publishedMonth>8</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2009</publishedYear><publishedDate>2009-08-25</publishedDate><doi>10.1145/1596486.1596489</doi><url/><notes>In SAVCBS '09, Proc. 8th Intl. Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</notes><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Science and Engineering - Faculty</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>FGSEN</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2013-10-17T15:28:14.4680979</lastEdited><Created>2012-02-23T17:02:03.0000000</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Peter</firstname><surname>Mosses</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5826-7520</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling	2013-10-17T15:28:14.4680979 v2 41 2012-02-23 Component-based semantics 3f13b8ec315845c81d371f41e772399c 0000-0002-5826-7520 Peter Mosses Peter Mosses true false 2012-02-23 FGSEN <p>Formal semantic descriptions have many potential pragmatic advantages over informal descriptions. Unfortunately, however, the major frameworks for formal semantics do not support component-based description of programming languages. Different languages often have many constructs in common, but the corresponding parts of their semantic descriptions are not generally reusable. The lack of reusable components is one of the reasons why it has been an immense effort to give a semantic description of any larger language.</p><p>Here, we consider two semantic frameworks that do support component-based language description: action semantics, and a modular variant of structural operational semantics (MSOS). We analyse how the semantics of individual constructs can be described independently in these frameworks, explaining the key insights. We also speculate on the possible applicability of similar techniques in component-based software development.</p> Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 3 10 ACM 25 8 2009 2009-08-25 10.1145/1596486.1596489 In SAVCBS '09, Proc. 8th Intl. Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands COLLEGE NANME Science and Engineering - Faculty COLLEGE CODE FGSEN Swansea University 2013-10-17T15:28:14.4680979 2012-02-23T17:02:03.0000000 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science Peter Mosses 0000-0002-5826-7520 1
title	Component-based semantics
spellingShingle	Component-based semantics Peter Mosses
title_short	Component-based semantics
title_full	Component-based semantics
title_fullStr	Component-based semantics
title_full_unstemmed	Component-based semantics
title_sort	Component-based semantics
author_id_str_mv	3f13b8ec315845c81d371f41e772399c
author_id_fullname_str_mv	3f13b8ec315845c81d371f41e772399c_***_Peter Mosses
author	Peter Mosses
author2	Peter Mosses
format	Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract
container_start_page	3
publishDate	2009
institution	Swansea University
doi_str_mv	10.1145/1596486.1596489
publisher	ACM
college_str	Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id	facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title	Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id	facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title	Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str	School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science
document_store_str	0
active_str	0
description	<p>Formal semantic descriptions have many potential pragmatic advantages over informal descriptions. Unfortunately, however, the major frameworks for formal semantics do not support component-based description of programming languages. Different languages often have many constructs in common, but the corresponding parts of their semantic descriptions are not generally reusable. The lack of reusable components is one of the reasons why it has been an immense effort to give a semantic description of any larger language.</p><p>Here, we consider two semantic frameworks that do support component-based language description: action semantics, and a modular variant of structural operational semantics (MSOS). We analyse how the semantics of individual constructs can be described independently in these frameworks, explaining the key insights. We also speculate on the possible applicability of similar techniques in component-based software development.</p>
published_date	2009-08-25T03:03:08Z
_version_	1763749488859545600
score	11.030847

Component-based semantics

Similar Items