ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Operational and axiomatic semantics of PCF
Full text PdfPdf (1.03 MB)
Source Conference on LISP and Functional Programming archive
Proceedings of the 1990 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming table of contents
Nice, France
Pages: 298 - 306  
Year of Publication: 1990
ISBN:0-89791-368-X
Authors
Brian T. Howard  Department of Computer Science, Stanford University
John C. Mitchell  Department of Computer Science, Stanford University
Sponsors
INRIA : Institut Natl de Recherche en Info et en Automatique
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages
SIGSAM: ACM Special Interest Group on Symbolic and Algebraic Manipulation
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 13,   Downloads (12 Months): 39,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/91556.91677
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

PCF, as considered in this paper, is a lazy typed lambda calculus with functions, pairing, fixed-point operators and arbitrary algebraic data types. The natural equational axioms for PCF include &eegr;-equivalence and the so-called “surjective pairing” axiom for pairs. However, the reduction system pcf&eegr;,sp defined by directing each equational axiom is not confluent, for virtually any choice of algebraic data types. Moreover, neither &eegr;-reduction nor surjective pairing seems to have a counterpart in ordinary execution. Therefore, we consider a smaller reduction system pcf without &eegr;-reduction or surjective pairing. The system pcf is confluent when combined with any linear, confluent algebraic rewrite rules. The system is also computationally adequate, in the sense that whenever a closed term of “observable” type has a pcf&eegr;,sp normal form, this is also the unique pcf normal form. Moreover, the equational axioms for PCF, including (&eegr;) and surjective pairing, are sound for pcf observational equivalence. These results suggest that if we take the equational axioms as defining the language, the smaller reduction system gives an appropriate operational semantics.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
Bar84
H.P. Barendregt. The Lambda Calculus: Its Syntax and Semantics. North Holland, 1984.
 
BT88
V. Breazu-Tannen. Combining algebra and higher-order types. In Third IEEE Syrnp. Logic in Computer Science, pages 82-90, 1988.
 
BTG89
 
Chu41
A. Church. The Calculi of Larnbda Conversion. Princeton Univ. Press, 1941. Reprinted 1963 by University Microfilms Inc., Ann Arbor, MI.
 
Hen80
HWWW85
 
Kd89
 
Klo80
J.W. Klop. Combinatory Reduction Systems. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht, 1980. Published as Mathematical Centei Tract 129.
 
Mit90
 
Nes89
D. Nesmith. The Church-Rosser property in higher-order rewrite systems. Manuscript, 1989.
 
Pey87
 
Plo77
G.D. Plotkin. LCF considered as a programming language. Theoretical Computer Science, 5:223-255, 1977.
 
Pot81
G. Porringer. The Church-Rosser theorem for typed A-calculus with surjective pairing. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 22(3):264-268, 1981.
 
Sco69
D.S. Scott. A type-theoretic alternative to CUCH, ISWIM, OWHY. Manuscript, 1969.
 
Tur85


Collaborative Colleagues:
Brian T. Howard: colleagues
John C. Mitchell: colleagues